Pimping Brown v. Board of Education: The Destruction of African … · 2020. 7. 31. · PIMPING...

North Carolina Central Law ReviewVolume 35Number 2 Volume 35, Number 2 Article 3

4-1-2013

Pimping Brown v. Board of Education: TheDestruction of African-American Schools and theMis-Education of African-American StudentsIrving Joyner

Follow this and additional works at: https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr

Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Education Law Commons, and the Lawand Race Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by History and Scholarship Digital Archives. It has been accepted for inclusion in North CarolinaCentral Law Review by an authorized editor of History and Scholarship Digital Archives. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Recommended CitationJoyner, Irving (2013) "Pimping Brown v. Board of Education: The Destruction of African-American Schools and the Mis-Education ofAfrican-American Students," North Carolina Central Law Review: Vol. 35 : No. 2 , Article 3.Available at: https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr/vol35/iss2/3

https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr?utm_source=archives.law.nccu.edu%2Fncclr%2Fvol35%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr/vol35?utm_source=archives.law.nccu.edu%2Fncclr%2Fvol35%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr/vol35/iss2?utm_source=archives.law.nccu.edu%2Fncclr%2Fvol35%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr/vol35/iss2/3?utm_source=archives.law.nccu.edu%2Fncclr%2Fvol35%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr?utm_source=archives.law.nccu.edu%2Fncclr%2Fvol35%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/585?utm_source=archives.law.nccu.edu%2Fncclr%2Fvol35%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages




https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr/vol35/iss2/3?utm_source=archives.law.nccu.edu%2Fncclr%2Fvol35%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]

PIMPING BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION:THE DESTRUCTION OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN

SCHOOLS AND THE MIS-EDUCATION OFAFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDENTS

IRVING JOYNER*

I. INTRODUCTION

Etched in the annals of civil rights and education law is thelandmark United States Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board ofEducation (Brown I).' This decision was monumental as it boldlyoverruled the "separate but equal" mandate the Supreme Court previ-ously announced in Plessy v. Ferguson.2 The decision in Plessy wasrelied upon by many states for support of its legal directives that Afri-can-American children should not be allowed to attend schools andother social and business institutions along with White children. Thisdoctrine of "separate but equal" was the legal crutch and authoriza-tion utilized by segregationists to maintain a perverse system of state-sponsored racial segregation in the United States. Without a doubt,the "separate but equal" mandate was the legal cornerstone of an eraof "Jim Crow" which subjugated African-Americans and other racialminorities and typecast them as "second class" citizens.' As such, theCourt's opinion in Brown I was a major victory against the forces ofracist repression and discrimination in America.

In Brown I, the Supreme Court, in an opinion authored by ChiefJustice Earl Warren, declared that the doctrine of "separate butequal" had no place in the field of education and was unconstitutionalbecause of the imposition of feelings of racial inferiority it cast upon

* Irving Joyner is a Professor at the North Carolina Central University School of Law.He is a graduate of the Rutgers University School of Law in Newark, New Jersey and receivedhis B.A. degree from Long Island University in Brooklyn, New York. He is deeply indebted toAttorney Denaa Griffin for her significant contributions to this article and to the N.C. CentralLaw Review staff for their outstanding research and editing efforts. This article is dedicated tothe memories of his mother, Dorothy Joyner, his aunt, Lucille Joyner Bryant, and his first gradeteacher, Ruth Bell Bryant.

1. Brown v. Bd. of Educ. (Brown 1), 347 U.S. 483 (1954).2. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).3. See, e.g., OPHELIA DE LAINE GONA, DAwN OF DESEGREGATION: J.A. DE LAINE AND

Briggs v. Elliott, 7 (2011) (discussing the doctrine in relation to the further disenfranchisement ofAfrican Americans in southern states).

160

1

Joyner: Pimping Brown v. Board of Education: The Destruction of African-A

Published by History and Scholarship Digital Archives, 2013

DESTRUCTION AND MIS-EDUCATION

African-American children.' The immediate assumption when the de-cision was announced- which remains the assumption today- wasthat segregated African-American schools were inferior in the qualityof the education provided to their students and that these studentswere functional illiterates or sub-par.5

The remedial premise, which developed from this thinking, was thatAfrican-American children could only receive a quality education orhave a chance to succeed in America if they were educated in thesame facilities that White children attended. 6 This thinking intention-ally ignored the reality that African-Americans communities were do-ing an excellent job in providing high quality education to theirchildren.

In its opinion, however, the Court made passing reference to thefact that most of the schools in the challenged school district, althoughsegregated, were virtually equal with respect to the quantifiable fac-tors used by the Court at that time.' In addition, the Court noted theexistence of a large number of outstanding African-Americans whohad excelled in a variety of professions and occupations and that theseindividuals were the product of a segregated education.'

The Brown I litigation strategy, however, was not designed to praiseand explain the value of African-American schools, their history, cul-ture and outstanding achievements. At no point in this case did thelitigants discuss the superior results of African-American schools de-spite the absence of comparable funding or how a dedicated teachingcore of African-Americans personally compensated for these inade-quacies to create schools of excellence. Rather, the focus in Brown Iwas the elimination of segregation and the educational setting was thevenue chosen to illustrate the evils of state-sponsored discrimination.9

As such, the Court's discussion did not raise that issue. The truth ofthe matter is that segregation was meant by its originators and sup-

4. Brown I, 347 U.S. at 494-95.5. See Vanessa Siddle Walker, Valued Segregated Schools for African American Children in

the South, 1935-1969: A Review of Common Themes and Characteristics, 70 REV. EDuc. RE-

SEARCH 253, 253 (2000).6. See, e.g., Sarah J. Reber, From Separate and Unequal to Integrated and Equal? School

Desegregation and School Finance in Louisiana, 93 REv. ECON. & STAT. 404, 404-415 (2011),available at http://ll.ccpr.ucla.edu/papers/REStat-LA-Finance-Reber.pdf.

7. Brown 1, 347 U.S. at 492 ("Here .. . there are findings below that the Negro and whiteschools involved have been equalized, or are being equalized, with respect to buildings, curric-ula, qualifications and salaries of teachers, and other 'tangible' factors.").

8. Id. at 490 (providing that several African-Americans have been successful "in the artsand sciences as well as the business and professional world" despite segregated schools).

9. Id. at 488 ("The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not 'equal' andcannot be made 'equal,' and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the laws.");see also, e.g., Sabrina Zirkel & Nancy Cantor, 50 Years After Brown v. Board of Education: ThePromise and Challenge of Multicultural Education, 60 J. SOC. ISSUES, 1, 3-4 (2004), available athttp://www.mills.edu/academics/faculty/educ/szirkel/50years04jsi.pdf.

2013] 161

2

North Carolina Central Law Review, Vol. 35, No. 2 [2013], Art. 3

https://archives.law.nccu.edu/ncclr/vol35/iss2/3

162 NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL LAW REVIEW [Vol. 35:160

porters to be a destructive force for African-Americans, but that "badintent" was turned on its head as African-Americans seized the op-portunity to turn the segregated African-American schools into mod-els of academic excellence.

The Brown I litigants and Justices also recognized that the FederalConstitution did not mandate a right to an education; therefore, thequality of African-American schools was not a proper issue for theCourt to consider.'o To this point, the Court reasoned that, "it isdoubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in lifeif he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity,where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must bemade available to all on equal terms."" By the use of "equal terms,"the Court was speaking to the legal mandate imposed by many statesthat required the segregation of school children based upon theirrace.12 This analysis completely ignored previous conclusions by lowercourts that the schools, which were being challenged in this litigation,were equal in their delivery and provision of education to children."In the Court's view, legally mandated segregation implied inferiorityand was a step toward reducing African-Americans "to the conditionof a subject race."14

In Chief Justice Warren's decision, the Court acknowledged, but thepoint was generally ignored, that "many [African-Americans had]achieved outstanding success in the arts and sciences as well as in thebusiness and professional world."" Although this point was made, thefact that these accomplished and outstanding individuals were mostprobably educated in segregated schools was definitely not a part ofthe Court's discussion or thinking. At the time, the Court should havebeen aware of the outstanding academic accomplishments of African-

10. See John David Fassett, Earl E. Pollock, E. Barrett Prettyman Jr., Frank E.A. Sander &John Q. Barrett, Supreme Court Law Clerks' Recollections of Brown v. Board of Education, 78Sr. Jo-N's L. REv. 515, 539 (2004).

11. Brown I, 347 U.S. at 493 (emphasis added).12. Id.13. See Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 98 F. Supp. 797, 798 (D. Kan. 1951) (providing that "curric-

ula, courses of study, qualification of and quality of teachers, as well as other educational facili-ties in the two sets of schools are comparable" to each other); Briggs v. Elliott, 103 F. Supp. 920,922 (E.D.S.C. 1952) (providing that "the curricula of the [Wihite and [African-American]schoolshave already been equalized" and that "beginning of the next scholastic year, physical conditionswill be equalized"); Davis v. Cnty. Sch. Bd., 103 F. Supp. 337, 340-41 (E.D. Va. 1952) (providingthat "in [twenty-nine] of the even hundred counties in Virginia, the schools and facilities for the[African-Americans] are equal to the [W]hite schools, in [seventeen] more they are now supe-rior" but that inequality does exist "in respect to buildings, facilities, curricula and buses"); Geb-hart v. Belton, 33 Del. Ch. 144, 145-49 (1952) (providing that certain components of theeducational offerings were equal while others were not).

14. Brown I, 347 U.S. at 490 n.5 (quoting Strauder v. W. Virginia, 100 U.S. 303, 307-08(1879)).

15. Brown I, 347 U.S. at 490.

3




Americans because the prior cases heard by the Court challenging as-pects of the "separate but equal" doctrine involved African-Ameri-cans who possessed outstanding academic credentials and who weredemonstrating academic excellence.16

In Brown 1, the Supreme Court reviewed lower court decisionsfrom four separate jurisdictions: Topeka, Kansas; New Castle County,Delaware; Clarendon County, South Carolina; and Prince EdwardCounty, Virginia." In those cases, the lower district trial courts con-cluded that the segregated African-American schools were equal toWhite schools "with respect to buildings, curricula, qualifications andsalaries of teachers, and other 'tangible' factors."" In the Delaware,South Carolina, Virginia and Kansas cases, the lower courts also de-termined that the school systems were nearly or completely equal incertain respects. 9 These findings were adopted in Chief Justice War-ren's opinion.2 0 Nevertheless, the Court concluded that segregation, asa legally mandated doctrine in the public school system, had a detri-mental effect upon African-American children.2 1 The irony of theBrown (I) decision was that, despite this judicial determination, mostsegregated African-American schools were doing an outstanding jobeducating, training and preparing their students to confront and over-come the racism which they would be subjected to and forced to con-front in their future.

II. FRINK HIGH SCHOOL HISTORY

When Brown I was decided in 1954, I was an elementary schoolstudent at Frink High School in the Town of LaGrange in LenoirCounty, North Carolina. LaGrange was located in the eastern ruralpart of the state, which was widely known and celebrated for its spe-cially cultivated tobacco crops.2 2 In that town, I was a part of a nurtur-ing and insulated African-American community that successfullysought to protect its children from the dangers of the racial terror andbigotry that controlled these and other eastern North Carolina com-munities. Frink High School was staffed by a dedicated cadre of highlyeducated, competent, and motivated teachers and principals. Mem-

16. See Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337 (1938); Sipuel v. Bd. of Regents ofUniv. of Okla., 332 U.S. 631 (1948); Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 (1950); McLaurin v. Okla.State Regents for Higher Educ., 339 U.S. 637 (1950).

17. Brown I, 347 U.S. at 486 n.1.18. Id. at 492.19. See supra note 13.20. Brown 1, 347 U.S. at 492.21. Id. at 494.22. Patsy M. Boyette, A Brief History of La Grange, LA GRANGE, NORTH CAROLINA, http:/

/lagrangenc.com/history (last visited Jan. 13, 2013).

2013] 163

4




bers of this staff were also victims of the same racial discriminationand bias that they sought to help their students escape.

Frink was one of more than 5,000 Rosenwald schools created in theSouth and 800 created in North Carolina as a result of the philan-thropy of Jewish financier Julius Rosenwald, the Chief Executive Of-ficer of Sears, Roebuck and Company.2 3 The school opened in 1920 ina five-room building with four teachers and 200 students.2 4 Originallynamed the LaGrange Colored High School, Frink was one of manyschools in North Carolina that was named after a local African-Amer-ican educator or leader.25 Dr. E.B. Frink, an acknowledged educatorand the school's fifth principal, was responsible for significantly up-grading the school's facilities, staff and curriculum.26

The school was destroyed by fire in 1930,27 and it was rebuilt bylocal African-American residents who were determined that its chil-dren needed and would have a quality education. 28 After the schoolwas rebuilt, Dr. Frink was hired as principal in 1932 and served in thatcapacity for nineteen years. 2 9 During that time, he oversaw theschool's growth from a staff of five teachers and 200 students into arural institution with thirty-four teachers and over 1100 students. 0 Af-ter his sudden death in 1951, the local African-American communitydemanded the school be named in his honor because of his successesand the outstanding academic, civic and community contributions hemade during his tenure.31

I knew many of the teachers who taught at African-Americanschools in LaGrange, Goldsboro and Kinston because they lived in oraround my little town and community or were members of my family.In fact, some of my aunts, uncles and cousins were teachers or had

23. Tom Hanchett, Rosenwald School History, HISTORY SouTH, http://www.historysouth.org/schoolhistory.html (last visited Mar. 3, 2013); see also North Carolina Rosenwald Schools,HISTORY SOUTH, http://historysouth.org/schoolsnc.html#l (last visited Mar. 11, 2013) (identifyingLa Grange as one of the numerous North Carolina Rosenwald Schools).

24. About E.B. Frink, E.B. FRINK MIDDLE SCHOOL, http://schools.lenoir.kl2.nc.us/ebfrink/about.htm (last visited Mar. 11, 2013); see also Justin Hill, School has Remained Vital for LaGrange Students for 90 Years, FREE PRESS (Kinston, N.C.), Nov. 18, 2010, at 1 (providing thatthe school expanded between 1930 and 1950 by adding several buildings and new facultymembers).

25. About E.B. Frink, E.B. FRINK MIDDLE SCHOOL, http://schools.lenoir.kl2.nc.us/ebfrink/about.htm (last visited Mar. 11, 2013).

26. Id.27. Id.28. See generally The History of E.B. Frink Middle School, FREE PRESS (Kinston, N.C.),

Nov. 18, 2010, at 1 (providing that renovations were made to the school after it burned down in1930).

29. About E.B. Frink, E.B. FRINK MIDDLE SCHOOL, http://schools.lenoir.kl2.nc.us/ebfrink/about.htm (last visited Mar. 11, 2013).

30. Id.31. Id.

5




prepared themselves academically to teach. For these teachers andtheir cohorts, who regularly visited with my family, teaching was aspecial calling to which they committed their lives. They took theirchosen profession seriously and viewed it as a "special calling" be-cause they knew the salvation of African-Americans rested in theirability to become educated, trained and prepared to confront the evilsof segregation and racism to which they were accustomed and knewintimately. They also knew that they were the only ones who would bewilling and able to provide this education.

As a rule, teachers knew the students, their families and special cir-cumstances or experiences that impacted their ability to become goodstudents. As students progressed from grade-to-grade, teachers fol-lowed and encouraged their academic development. In a very realsense, each teacher, as a part of a teaching team, was invested in thestudents and regularly contributed to the learning process even afterthe student was no longer assigned to their classroom.

My favorite teacher and guardian angel was Mrs. Ruth Bell Bryant.She took a special interest in my education even before I entered thefirst grade as a teacher of my Sunday School classes at Ebenezer Mis-sionary Baptist Church where she used Sunday School texts to teachme and other young members how to read. She also directed the threechoirs (senior, youth and gospel), was a Mother (Deaconess) of thechurch, and coordinated the Easter, Christmas and other special pro-grams. She lived around the corner from my family and was mymother's first grade teacher when she started school. During mymother's early years as a student at Frink, Mrs. Bryant was herteacher, biggest supporter, inspiration and advisor. In like fashion, shewas the same for me and had my family's permission to treat me as if Iwere her child. That meant that she could spank or otherwise disci-pline me when that became necessary.

Mrs. Bryant was not alone in her personal adoptions of various stu-dents at the school. She and other teachers took special pride in theirstudents' successes and encouraged them to actively engage in schooland community activities. During those years of segregated schoolsand communities, many African-American teachers possessed similaror better academic qualifications and credentials than their Whitecounter-parts and principals at all-White schools.32 In their own way,each of these teachers gave all they had for the students they taughtand the communities they served. Even though African-Americanteachers were paid less on average than White teachers,3 3 they used

32. See Walker, supra note 5, at 266.33. See Davison M. Douglas, The Rhetoric of Moderation: Desegregating the South During

the Decade After Brown, 89 Nw. U.L. REV. 92, 101 n.42 (1994).

2013] 165

6




their own funds and conducted fund-raising efforts to supplement thedeliberately inadequate budgets and resources that were provided bythe State of North Carolina through the Lenoir County SchoolBoard. 34 In addition, African-American teachers were held in high es-teem within the community, and the profession commanded respectand admiration from students and their parents.

III. BENEFITS OF SEGREGATED AFRICAN-AMERICAN SCHOOLS

Doctor Gerrelyn Patterson, Assistant Professor at North CarolinaCentral University, surveyed former Hillside High School studentsfrom Durham, North Carolina, who attended the school during thedays of segregation." She concluded:

Black teachers held a special role in the community. They were re-vered and respected. They were a part of the community because theylived in the neighborhoods, attended local churches, and taught sev-eral generations within families. There was a powerful and unbreak-able community, cultural, and spiritual connection that they held withthe students and their families. . . . [J]ust as important was how Blackteachers did not have to learn or "get to know" Black students andtheir inherent abilities. Black teachers already knew them and whatthey could accomplish, so no time was wasted building relationshipsbefore learning could begin.36

In Patterson's presentation, she also observed:Before school desegregation, [B]lack culture was synonymous withschool culture. There was no disconnect or need for [B]Ilack studentsto assimilate into the majority culture. School, home, and communitywere familiar and comfortable places where racial identity was not achallenge to be overcome. Moreover, school stakeholders gave ex-plicit lessons on how to be a minority and succeed within the domi-nant culture. Alumni expressed frustration over the loss of overtlymodeling and teaching these lessons to [B]lack students.

At the center of the success of African-American schools prior todesegregation were the personal, spiritual and communal relation-ships between African-American students, parents and teachers. Dur-ing the many annual gatherings of Frink Alumni, participants have

34. See generally Walker, supra note 5, at 266 (discussing the financial sacrifices made byAfrican-American teachers who "purchased school supplies for their classrooms, and helped tosupply clothing for students whose parents had fewer financial resources and scholarshipmoney" for those seeking to attend college).

35. Gerrelyn Patterson, Assistant Professor, North Carolina Central University, Panel Dis-cussion at the School of Education of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: SchoolDesegregation: It Depends On Us (Sept. 24-25, 2010), available at http://soe.unc.edu/125years/patterson-essay.php.

36. Id.37. Id.

7




evaluated and extoled the virtues and benefits of the personal and up-close relationships which they enjoyed with their teachers.

These relationships were particularly important in North Carolinawhere segregated schools were a central and celebrated part of thelives of African-Americans. The segregated communities in whichthese schools were located took great pride in supporting the schoolsand encouraging their students to make a better life for themselves.Usually this meant that the students, once they graduated from highschool, had to relocate to some locale outside of North Carolinawhere racial discrimination and prejudice were not as widespread andwoven into the local fabric of life.

For young African-Americans, this "moving-out and moving-on"experience became known as the "Great Migration."3 8 During thisperiod of time, millions of young African-Americans left North Caro-lina and other southern states to seek employment and the promise ofthe American dream in the emerging industrialized north and in otherparts of the country.39 African-American school officials knew thattheir graduates were equally or better prepared academically thanwere similarly situated White students and that the biggest problemthese students would encounter in the future would be racial bias,prejudice and discrimination from the larger American society. Assuch, students were imbued with the truism that they had to be threeor four times better prepared than the White graduates against whomthey would compete for jobs and other economic benefits.

With the exception of vocational education instructors, most of theteachers in the African-American schools were females and the princi-pals were males.4 0 These instructors and administrators representedthe most stable economic contributors to the local African-Americaneconomy.4 1 For these highly trained and motivated professionals inNorth Carolina, teaching was the very best job available to them. Innearly every case, these teachers constituted a substantial portion ofthe aspiring African-American middle class community. They lived inthe same community as the students, attended the same churches,shopped in the same stores and suffered the same impact of racismthat other African-Americans were forced to endure. Instead of leav-ing these communities and migrating north, as so many graduates did,

38. See Great Migration: The African-American Exodus North, NAT'L PUB. RADIO (Sept.

13, 2010, 12:00 PM), http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyld=129827444.39. See Id.40. See Linda C. Tillman, (Un)intended Consequences? The Impact of the Brown v. Board

of Education Decision on the Employment Status of Black Educators, 36 EDUC. & URB. Soc'Y280, 282 (2004). See generally About E.B. Frink, supra note 29 (providing that the first principalsof LaGrange Colored High School included John Green, Carlyle Smith, and Emmett BentleyFrink).

41. See Tillman, supra note 40, at 282.

2013] 167

8




they personally fought racism and discrimination by preparing chil-dren for the many battles against racism that they would have to fight.

IV. IMPACT OF BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION I

To understand the impact of the Brown I decision on African-American communities, it is important to recall that North Carolinawas touted as a "racially moderate state" prior to 1954.42 In the fieldof education, North Carolina, to its credit, provided more economicsupport for its African-American schools when compared to otherstates in the United States.4 3 In addition, African-Americans were em-powered to manage and control the academic and budgetary opera-tions of each school.4 4 This moderation in racial matters was viewed,in hindsight, as a portion of North Carolina's legal and public policystrategy to stay a step ahead of legal attacks by the National Associa-tion for Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).45

As early as 1927, an NAACP study concluded that disparities infunding for teachers' salaries, facility costs and other expenditures be-tween African-American schools and all-White schools were smallerin North Carolina than in any southern state.46 As a result of NorthCarolina's political strategy, African-American schools enjoyed andachieved a level of academic quality that equaled or exceeded that ofmost of the White schools in the state.47

An example of this strategy occurred in 1939 following the UnitedStates Supreme Court's decision in Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Ca-nada.48 In that decision, the Court ruled that Missouri unlawfully dis-criminated against an African-American citizen of that state when hesought admission to the University of Missouri Law School.4 9 Consis-tent with the Plessy decision, which sanctioned state-imposed segrega-

42. Douglas, supra note 33, at 100.43. See id. at 102-03 (discussing the North Carolina General Assembly's efforts to increase

teacher salaries for African-Americans and to appropriate larger sums of money for African-American schools).

44. See generally Douglas, supra note 33, at 102 (providing that NAACP challenges to une-qual expenditures in schools "induced the North Carolina General Assembly to appropriateincreasingly larger sums of money" for African-American schools).

45. Douglas, supra note 33, at 101-02.46. W.E.B. Du Bois, The Negro Common School in North Carolina, 34 CRISIS 79 (May

1927).47. See Douglas, supra note 33, at 101-02 (providing that the North Carolina General As-

sembly increased the salary of African-American teachers so that they earned "more than whiteteachers because of their higher qualifications" by 1945 and appropriated "increasingly largersums of money" to African-American schools).

48. Charles E. Daye, People African-American and Other Minority Students and Alumni, 73N.C. L. REv. 675, 678 (1995); see also Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337 (1938).

49. Missouri ex rel. Gaines, 305 U.S. at 352.

9




tion and legally mandated the doctrine of "separate but equal," 0 theSchool of Law of the State University of Missouri denied admission toAfrican-Americans."' The Court in Missouri ex rel. Gaines found thatMissouri provided a legal education for Whites, but did not provide asimilar, although separate, opportunity for that state's African-Ameri-

52can citizens.In response to the decision which over-turned Missouri's admissions

policy, the North Carolina General Assembly without a request or anyeffort by African-Americans to enter the segregated University ofNorth Carolina Law School, established the south's first African-American law school at North Carolina College.53 The establishmentof the law school occurred immediately after the Missouri ex rel.Gaines decision was announced. It happened so quickly and withoutany planning that officials at North Carolina College were unable toadequately advertise the program and seek students before the startof the 1939 academic year.5 4 Legislators established the law school toprotect the University of North Carolina Law School from a Missouriex rel. Gaines inspired lawsuit by the NAACP on the grounds that thestate did not have a law school African-Americans could attend.55

In 1940, when the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Alstonv. School Board of Norfolk that a Virginia school district violatedPlessy and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amend-ment due to salary disparities between White and African-Americanteachers, 6 the North Carolina General Assembly increased the pay ofits African-American teachers and principals." As a result, the sala-ries for North Carolina's African-American teachers were equalizedwith the salaries of White teachers.5 By 1945, some African-Ameri-

50. See Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, 551-52 (1896).51. Missouri ex rel. Gaines, 305 U.S. at 344.

52. Id. at 349-50.

53. N.C. Cent. Univ. Sch. of Law, History, N.C. CENT. SCH. LAw, http://law.nccu.edu/about/history/ (last visited Feb. 25, 2013) (providing that House Bill 18 enacted on March 1, 1939 by theNorth Carolina General Assembly "paved the way for a new generation of African-Americanlaywers" as it authorized the establishment of a law school at North Carolina College for Ne-groes, which subsequently became North Carolina Central University School of Law).

54. Id. (noting that only one student registered for law school for the fall of 1939).55. So Far 70th Anniversary Bulletin, North Carolina Central University School of Law,

(October, 2009) p. 9, available at http://law.nccu.edu/wordpress/img/upload/2010/09/so-far-2009.pdf See N.C. CENT. UNIV. SCH. LAw, NCCU SCHOOL OF LAw: So FAR 7Th-H ANNIVERSARY 9(2009), available at http://law.nccu.edu/wordpress/img/uploads/2010/09/so-far-2009.pdf.

56. Alston v. Sch. Bd. of Norfolk, 112 F.2d 992, 997 (4th Cir. 1940).

57. See generally N. C. Newbold, Some Achievements in the Equalization of EducationalOpportunities in North Carolina, 9 EDuc. F. 451, 457-59 (1945) (providing that teacher salarieswere equal by 1944).

58. Douglas, supra note 33, at 102.

2013] 169

10




can teachers, due to the higher academic qualifications they possessed,were earning more than White teachers.

By the same token, the NAACP directed litigation and threatenedmore lawsuits attacking unequal funding for academic programs andinadequate physical structures, which between 1945 and 1950 spurredthe North Carolina General Assembly to appropriate additional fund-ing to upgrade African-American schools.60 As a result of these ac-tions, North Carolina's African-American schools were better fundedand better resourced than most segregated schools in the country.6 1

The success of the NAACP's filed lawsuits in other states andthreatened lawsuits in North Carolina pushed the North CarolinaGeneral Assembly to stay a step ahead of the litigation to come andresulted in the creation of a "racially moderate" image for the state.62

These efforts to upgrade African-American schools were designedsolely to avoid litigation over the "separate but equal" doctrine and toprotect White schools from being forced to admit African-Americanstudents. 63 Obvious beneficiaries of these efforts were African-Ameri-can students, teachers and the facilities in which these students wereeducated. These legislative enactments were used to improve the edu-cational opportunities and accomplishments for African-Americanschools and communities.

During the many years of segregation, North Carolina's African-American communities were devoted and committed to improving ed-ucational opportunities for their children. African-American schoolfacilities were adequate for the task. By the 1951-1952 school year, theState operated 1934 White elementary schools and high schools.64 Atthe same time, there were 1162 African-American elementary schoolsand high schools.6 5 In these segregated schools, 20,885 Whites and8031 African-Americans were employed as teachers along with 1317Whites and 443 African-Americans who were employed as princi-pals.6 6 In general, all of the schools were under the direction of aWhite superintendent, but an African-American served under thatperson as the superintendent of the "colored" schools.6' Although the

59. Id.60. Id. at 102-03.61. Id. at 103.62. Id. at 97.63. See id. at 103-04.64. STATE OF N.C. SUPERINTENDENT OF PUB. INSTRUCTION, BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE

SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF NORT I CAROLINA FOR THE SCHOLASTIC YEARS1950-1951 AND 1951-1952, PART ONE, 24 (1952).

65. Id.66. Id. at 39 (providing that this data represents the number of teachers for the 1951-1952

school year).67. See generally id. at 23-4 (discussing requirements and responsibilities of

superintendents).

11




state incrementally increased the funding for African-Americanschools from 1950 until 1970 in its yearly budgets, the per capita ex-penditures never matched the budgets that were allocated for Whiteschools.68

According to a report from the Southern Education Reporting Ser-vice, in 1960, only thirty-four of over 300,000 African-American stu-dents attended White schools.6 9 By the 1961-1962 academic year,North Carolina employed more African-American teachers than anystate in the union."o During that academic year, there were 11,255 Af-rican-American teachers and 29,009 White teachers." Of this number,more African-American teachers possessed higher education certifica-tions and advanced degrees than White teachers in the state. Duringthe 1949-1950 academic year, 278 of the 7,580 African-Americanteachers had less than a four-year college degree, but by the 1961-1962academic year, that number decreased to only four out of the 11,149African-American teachers.7 2 The number of White teachers who didnot possess a four-year college degree was significantly higher." Acomparison of North Carolina principals in 1961-1962 showed that ofthe 554 African-Americans, 471 or eighty-five percent possessed agraduate degree while 1,292 or seventy-eight percent of the 1653White principals possessed the same degree.7 4 It is clear that African-American principals and teachers were not academically inferior totheir White counterparts in any respect. Similar to other African-American schools, Frink's Principal and many of its teachers heldmaster's and doctoral degrees.

Because of political pressure exerted by African-American commu-nities, led by its teachers and principals, Frink and many other segre-gated schools in the state operated in adequate physical structures.

68. Vanessa Siddle Walker, African-American Teachers in the South: 1940-1960, AM. EDUC.RESEARCH JOURNAL, Vol. 38, No. 4, 751-79 (Winter 2001).

69. Id.70. N.C. ADVISORY COMM. TO THE U.S. COMM'N ON CIVIL RIGHTS, EQUAL PROTECTION

OF THE LAWS IN NORTH CAROLINA North Carolina 101 (1959-62).71. Id.72. STATE OF N.C. SUPERINTENDENT OF PUB. INSTRUCTION, BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE SU-

PERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF NORTH CAROLINA FOR THE SCHOLASTIC YEARS

1948-1949 AND 1949-1950, PART ONE, 24 (1952); STATE OF N.C. SUPERINTENDENT OF PUB.INSTRUCTION, BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF NORTH

CAROLINA FOR THE SCHOLASTIC YEARS 1960-1961 AND 1961-1962, PART ONE, 37 (1962).73. STATE OF N.C. SUPERINTENDENT OF PUB. INSTRUCTION, BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE SU-


1948-1949 AND 1949-1950, supra note 72; STATE OF N.C. SUPERINTENDENT OF PUB. INSTRUC-TION, BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF NORTH CARO-

ILINA FOR THE SCHOLASTIC YEARS 1960-1961 AND 1961-1962, supra note 72, at 38-9.74. STATE OF N.C. SUPERINTENDENT OF PUB. INSTRUCTION, BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE SU-


1960-1961 AND 1961-1962, supra note 72, at 38-39.

2013] 171

12




While it is true that books and other transferrable supplies were"handed-down" from White schools," African-American principalsand teachers successfully utilized every resource at their disposal toprovide a quality education for their students.

Although the schools were segregated, the African-American com-munity - historically, politically, culturally and socially - embracedthem as their own. There was a sense of community pride in the oper-ation and presence of the schools as they were viewed as treasuresthat African-Americans operated and controlled to the maximum ex-tent possible. Frink, like most segregated schools in North Carolina,had active parent-teacher associations that allowed both teachers andparents to participate in making decisions regarding the school'sgrowth and development. Thus, even though African-Americans wereprohibited from voting for government officials or participating in thepolitical franchise,7 6 they exerted a large measure of control over theirschools and their churches.

In this environment, parents placed faith in their schools and teach-ers. They looked to them to adequately prepare their children for afuture that would be better than the daily reality their parents exper-ienced. In addition, there was an absolute faith that teachers weremaking a significant contribution to the community and the commu-nity, in turn, entrusted their children into the teachers' care and cus-tody. Because of this trust, almost ninety percent of the children in theFrink High School area attended school dating back to 1933, whichwas long before mandatory attendance laws were enacted.77 Few Afri-can-Americans students, despite living in a depressed economic ruralcommunity, dropped out of school. As evidence of this faith and trust,statistics from the 1944-1945 academic year indicate that only 5.8% ofAfrican-Americans students in comparison to 6.2% of White studentsdropped out of school." By the 1961-1962 academic year, this per-centage for African-Americans improved to 3.9% while the Whitedropout rate was 4.1%.9

75. Robert Kelly-Goss, Last of the One-room Schoolhouses, DAILYADVANCE.COM (Nov.14, 2012), http://www.dailyadvance.com/features/last-one-room-schoolhouses-1368645.

76. See N. Cal. Citizenship Project, U.S. Voting Rights Timeline, 3 (2004), http://www.kqed.orglassets/pdf/education/digitalmedia/us-voting-rights-timeline.pdf (addressing the inability tovote because "state officials refused to allow African Americans to register by using voting taxes,literacy tests, and violent intimidation" efforts).

77. Interview with Dr. Allen Mewborn, former Principal of Frink High Sch. in LaGrange,N.C. (Sept. 2012).

78. Id.79. STATE OF N.C. SUPERINTENDENT OF PuB. INsTRUCTION, BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE Su-


1960-1961 AND 1961-1962, supra note 72, at 35.

13




Once enrolled at Frink High School, students did not drop out. Thefew students who did not finish on time completed their educationwithin a year of their scheduled graduation date. The principals andteachers would not allow students to fail to graduate, and they wentthe extra mile to ensure that graduation was an accomplishment in thelife of every child who attended the school. During those years, gradu-ation from high school was a "rite of passage" because it was the im-portant minimum qualification that a person needed to compete for adecent job in the north. No matter how smart you were as an African-American, no amount of education was sufficient to overcome racialdiscrimination in the south. As a result, many of the smartest andbrightest moved to the north.80 However, a large number of themenrolled in college in order to return to their hometowns and localcommunities to teach or engage in other business activities.8 '

Both groups of students were evidence of the outstanding productsAfrican-American principals and teachers produced. On a yearly ba-sis, literally hundreds of graduating students left LaGrange and otherNorth Carolina schools to go north where they were able to competeon an equal basis with individuals from other parts of the country forjobs and entry into rewarding professions and activities. Graduatesfrom the segregated Frink High School launched distinguished careersin education, the military, sports and entertainment, law, business, re-ligion and other fields including crime. For example, one of the firstfive-star Generals in the United States Army, Ralph Wooten 82 gradu-ated from Frink High School." He regularly returns to the town toinspire young people to excel in their studies and prepare for life'sjourney. By the same token, one of the most notorious "AmericanGangsters," Frank Lucas, was a native of the town, but was not a grad-uate of the school. 8 4

80. See Great Migration: The African American Exodus North, supra note 38; see also RICH-ARD B. BAKER, BOSTON UNIVERSITY, THE GREAT MIGRATION'S IMPACT ON THE EDUCATION

OF SOUTHERN-BORN AFRICAN AMERICANS 6 (2011), available at http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic881224.files/Baker-%2OThe%20Great%20Migration%20and%20Schooling.pdf.

81. See Shephard W. McKinley & Cynthia R. McKinley, The Great Migration and NorthCarolina, N.C. MUSEUM HISTORY, 3 (2006), http://www.ncmuseumofhistory.org/collateral/arti-cles/s06.great.migration.pdf.

82. See History of Fort McClellan 1917-1999, TRANSITION FORCE, http://www.mcclellan.army.mil/Info.asp (last visited Mar. 1, 2013) (noting that Major General Ralph G. Wooten wasthe "Commanding General and Chemical School Commandant for the United States Army).

83. Author notes that he was not a graduate, but attended the school until 1961. Author isan active supporter and member of the Frink-LaGrange Alumni and Friends Association. Thesenotable alumni, the school's history and other relevant issues are discussed on a regular basis atthe Association's meetings.

84. Frank Lucas Biography, BIo. TRUE STORY, http://www.biography.com/people/frank-lu-cas-253710 (last visited Mar. 1, 2013) (providing that Lucas was born on September 9, 1930 in LaGrange, North Carolina).

2013] 173

14




In addition, the school regularly graduated between ninety andninety-five percent of its students. This was a major accomplishmentsince many students resided on farms in the rural part of the county.Many students constantly struggled with the needs of their families toplant, grow and harvest the crops they grew and cultivated. Studentsfrom the rural parts of Lenoir County were bused, often past closerWhite schools, each day to Frink on buses that were provided by thestate and driven by students who were enrolled in the upper grades.Despite the legitimate competing interests of these families, the teach-ers found a way to get the children out of the fields and into the schoolwhere they were academically prepared for the future. Comparativescores and evaluation results measured through the Iowa Achieve-ment Test showed that students at Frink performed academically at alevel that was comparable to other students in North Carolina andaround the country who were evaluated by the same testinginstrument. 6

A fundamental part of the segregated school experience was com-petitions against other African-American schools in the surroundingarea. Whether the competitions were in basketball (where Frink ex-celled), football (where Frink did not excel),band, glee club or choir,interscholastic activities provided an opportunity for students to gainconfidence and demonstrate pride in themselves, their school andtheir community. When Frink's basketball teams competed againstsurrounding African-American schools from Kinston, Goldsboro,Greenville, Bayboro, Clinton and other locales, supporters regularlyorganized car caravans to attend the games and cheered their schoolson to victory. In this way, healthy rivalries were developed, en-couraged and institutionalized. In those days, segregated Whiteschools were prohibited from competing against African-Americanschools in any activities as a result of social convention and adminis-trative rules.

My discussion up to this point has centered on Frink High School, asmall county school in Lenoir County, North Carolina. The descrip-tion of the school, its history, culture, activities, values and accom-plishments applied to just about every other segregated African-American school in North Carolina during that time. Regardless ofthe specific town, city or county, graduates of segregated African-American schools can tell the same or similar stories. These graduatesextol the importance and accomplishments of their schools, graduates

85. Supra, note 83.86. Supra, note 83.87. See Peter St. Onge, Segregation in the South Extended to College Basketball Gyms (Dec.

1, 2010, 1:13 PM), http://blog.cleveland.com/startingblocks/print.html?entry=/2010/12/segrega-tion-in the-south exten.html.

15




and teachers as it relates to their education, growth and developmentin spite of the stifling and repressive racial environment in which theylived.88

V. THE IMPACT OF BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION ON

AFRICAN-AMERICAN SCHOOLS

The decision in Brown I unleashed a racial furor within southernWhite communities. Southern elected officials strongly condemnedthe Supreme Court, its Justices and the decision. Southern politiciansand racists organizations reacted with extreme anger and vowed toresist the desegregation of schools at all costs. As evidence of theiropposition, southern Representatives and Senators in Congress, in-cluding those from North Carolina, joined in the creation of a "South-ern Manifesto."8 9 The purpose of the "Southern Manifesto," whichwas introduced in Congress, was to denounce the Court's opinion andit was accompanied by calls for the impeachment of Chief Justice EarlWarren, the author of the Brown opinion.9 0

The Supreme Court in Brown I did not discuss and resolve the rem-edies that would be imposed upon the many school districts that wereactively operating segregated school systems. Instead, the Court or-dered attorneys for the parties, in a separate hearing, to further advisethe Court about appropriate remedies which might be used to addressthis new social and educational dynamic.

In Brown v. Board of Education (Brown II),92 the Supreme Courtwas confronted with the raw complexities associated with the task ofdesegregating the four affected school districts.9 3 Although the deseg-regation decree announced in Brown I had national implications, the

88. See generally Patterson, supra note 35 (providing that alumni of the all-African Ameri-can Hillside High School in Durham, North Carolina refelected on the significance of theirteachers and the importance of their school).

89. See 102 CONG. REC. 4459-61 (1956) (providing that politicians from southern states op-posed "the decision of the Supreme Court in the so-called segregation cases" and, as a result,promulgated the Declaration of Constitutional Principles); see also Historical Highlights: TheSouthern Manifesto of 1956, U.S. HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES: HIST., ART & ARCIIVES, http://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1951-2000/The-Southern-Manifesto-of-1956/ (last visitedFeb. 19, 2013) (providing that the Southern Manifesto was given the formal title, "Declaration ofConstitutional Principles").

90. See Historical Highlights: The Southern Manifesto of 1956, U.S. HOUSE REPRESENTA-

TIVEs: HIST., ART & ARCHIVES, http://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1951-2000/The-Southern-Manifesto-of-1956/ (last visited Feb. 19, 2013). See generally William G. Ross, Attacks

on the Warren Court by State Officials: A Case Study of Why Court-Curbing Movements Fail, 50BUFF. L. REv. 483, 506 (2002).

91. Brown v. Bd. of Educ. (Brown 1), 347 U.S. 483, 495 (1954) (The Southern Manifesto didnot call for Warren's impeachment, but various campaigns to impeach Warren were organizedand promoted at the time and were supported by signers of the Manifesto).

92. Brown v. Bd. of Educ. (Brown II), 349 U.S. 294 (1955).93. See id. at 298.

2013] 175

16




remedy portion affected only the four school districts identified as de-fendants in the litigation since the Court did not have jurisdiction overother school systems.94 With respect to those four districts, the Courtnoted that the defendants in Delaware, Kansas and the District of Co-lumbia had made substantial progress toward implementing theCourt's decree." This was not the case for the defendants in SouthCarolina and Virginia who were awaiting precise directions from theSupreme Court.96

In order to fashion appropriate remedies for the school jurisdictionsnamed in the litigation, the Court reasoned that a variety of equitableprinciples would have to be employed.97 According to the Court,those principles called for "elimination of a variety of obstacles inmaking the transition to school systems operated in accordance withthe constitutional principles set forth in [the Court's] May 17, 1954,decision."98 The Court warned that the vitality of the announced con-stitutional principles would not be disregarded "simply because of dis-agreement with them."99 As such, the Court directed that the named"defendants make a prompt and reasonable start toward full compli-ance with [the] May 17, 1954 ruling." 00

Despite anticipated problems, the Court remanded the cases to lo-cal courts for the development of appropriate remedies that would becompatible with the local conditions and needs. 01 The Court rea-soned that "[s]chool authorities have the primary responsibility forelucidating, assessing and solving these problems; courts will have toconsider whether the action of school authorities constitutes goodfaith implementation of the governing constitutional principles."102

Based upon the Court's directive, the appropriate resolution of thedesegregation policies and practices would be left to the "good faith"determinations of the very same political forces, law-makers and ad-ministrators who were previously responsible for keeping the schoolssegregated. By this singular act, the Court dealt a cruel and bitter pillto African-American communities.

The Supreme Court either failed to anticipate or failed to acknowl-edge that local school and other elected officials were intent on defy-ing the Court's mandate in every way possible. In fashioning itsambiguous remedies' directive to the lower courts, the Supreme Court

94. Id. at 299-301.95. Id. at 299.96. Id.97. Id. at 299-300.98. Id. at 300.99. Id.

100. Id.101. Id. at 299.102. Id.

17




added fuel to the "fire-storm" its decision would face throughout thesouth. In North Carolina, this "fire-storm" and opposition was no lessvehement, but was more publicly muted by White political leadersthan in other states.10 3 Brown II was seen by many as giving flexibilityto lower courts and local school officials to not rush the implementa-tion of the decree.1 04 In that decision, the Court directed the lowercourts "to take such proceedings and enter such orders and decreesconsistent with [the Brown (I) opinion] as [were] necessary andproper to admit to public schools on a racially nondiscriminatory basiswith all deliberate speed the parties to these cases.""os

The Brown I and Brown II decisions were received differentlywithin African-American communities. While there was joy for vic-tory against the doctrine of "separate, but equal," African-Americanswere suspicious and fearful of the consequences of this decision.There was considerable jubilation at the NAACP since its attorneys,led by Thurgood Marshall, began this litigation as a part of the cam-paign to over-turn the infamous Plessy decision.'0 6 The view from Af-rican-American communities was muted and elicited a cautiousresponse.

Few African-Americans in North Carolina and in other parts of theSouth wanted to lose their beloved schools or their teachers. Thewidely held view by most African-Americans was that if the schoolswere desegregated, African-Americans would be made to suffer.

Consequently, from 1954 through 1971, there was no major pushfrom North Carolina's African-American community to desegregatethe schools. There was an unsuccessful effort in Raleigh led by theHolt family to force the desegregation of the Raleigh school system.107

There were also sporadic school desegregation efforts in Greensboro,Wilmington, Rocky Mount and Charlotte.108 In every instance, Whites

103. See Douglas, supra note 33, at 93-97, 100-06; see also J. Michael McElreath, The Cost ofOpportunity: School Desegregation's Complicated Calculus in North Carolina, in WITH ALL DE-

LIBERATE SPEED: IMPLEMENTING Brown v. Board of Education, 21, 23 (Brian J. Daugherity &Charles C. Bolton eds., 2008).

104. See, e.g., supra note 10 (acknowleding that one of the misconceptions of the phrase "alldeliberate speed" was "that if those words hadn't been used, implementation" would have oc-curred more rapidly).

105. Brown II, 349 U.S. at 301.106. See NAACP Legal History, NAACP.ORG, http://www.naacp.org/pages/naacp-legal-his-

tory (last visited Mar. 15, 2013).107. An Episode in North Carolina History, Exhausted Remedies: Joe Holt's Story, JOE HOLT

STORY, http://www.joeholtstory.org/ (last visited Feb. 21, 2013); see also Heather K. McEntarfer,Catching Hell: The Joe Holt Integration Story, TERRAIN.ORG, http://www.terrain.org/essays/22/mcentarfer.htm (last visited Feb. 21, 2013).

108. See Douglas, supra note 33, at 130; McElreath, supra note 103, at 24; Ernie Murray,School History: A Short History of Rocky Mount Senior High, ROCKY MOUNT BLACKBIRDS,

http://rockymountblackbirds.com/school-history/ (last visited Feb. 23, 2013); Nicholas Grahamand John Blythe, This Month in North Carolina History: February 1971 - The Wilmington Ten,

2013] 177

18




engaged in angry resistance and local school boards used every devicethey could create to attempt to maintain segregated schools. 09 Fi-nally, in 1960, the Campbell family was successful in forcing the schoolboard to admit second grader William Campbell into Murphy Ele-mentary School in Raleigh."o When Campbell and his mother, JuneCampbell, arrived at the school to register, they were confronted by ahowling mob of Whites who attempted to physically prevent themfrom entering the school."1 Once inside the school, other students inhis class purposefully shunned young William Campbell.1 12

The reality within the state was that African-Americans did not pos-sess any political power to either advocate for the full implementationof Brown I or to resist such efforts. At the time, only a few African-Americans had been elected as local school board members, very fewwere elected as county commissioners or city council members, andnone had recently been elected to the North Carolina General Assem-bly or the United States Congress."' This systematic and purposefullack of political power, resulting from the long-lasting political dis-franchisement of African-Americans, prevented this community fromhaving a meaningful voice or from participation in the governance ofpolitical institutions within the state and local communities. In addi-tion, the vast majority of African-Americans were legally unable orotherwise disinclined to vote for White political leadership withintheir local communities. The only place African-Americans could ex-ercise any semblance of political power was within their segregatedschools, and that power was restricted to efforts to improve the qual-

UNC University Libraries, http://www.lib.unc.edu/ncc/ref/nchistory/feb2005/ (last visited Apr. 8,2013) (In the late 1960s and early 1970s many African Americans in Wilmington were dissatis-fied with the slow pace of school desegregation. Upon desegregation of the schools in the 1969-70 school year, violence erupted in the city of Wilmington.).

109. See, e.g., Douglas, supra note 33, at 130-31 ("By the summer of 1957, no school board inNorth Carolina had ever assigned a black child to a white school and no school board had evergranted a black child's transfer request to attend a white school.").

110. David Crabtree & Gerald Owens, 50 Years Later, Man Recalls Entering Raleigh's All-White Schools, WRAL.COM (Sept. 6, 2010), http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/8246656/.

111. Id. (Bill Campbell recounts how he felt unsafe everyday among the older, hostile stu-dents. Campbell told WRAL that his family told him that his role at the elementary school wasimportant and he was going to have to endure the poor treatment.)

112. See Crabtree & Owens, supra note 110 (noting the unsafe and hostile environment atschool that made Campbell's life more difficult).

113. See Henry Frye, LEARN NC, http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-recent/5084 (lastvisited Mar. 15, 2013) (providing that Frye was elected to the North Carolina General Assemblyin 1968 and that he was the first African American to be elected since 1899); see also Clayton,Eva M., U.S. Housi REPRESENTATIVES: HisT., ART & ARCHIVEs, http://history.house.gov/PEOPLE/DETAIL/11065?RET=TRUE (providing that Clayton was the first African-AmericanRepresentative from North Carolina since 1901) (last visited Mar. 15, 2013). Note that during theJim Crow era, African-Americans were not elected. During Reconstruction and up to 1901, Afri-can-Americans were elected to many political posts, but that ended soon after the 1898 Wilming-ton rebellion.

19




ity of that educational product with the inadequate resourcesprovided.

In addition to their lack of political power, most African-Americansdid not mount a campaign to force compliance with Brown I becauseof widespread satisfaction with their schools. For distinctly differentreasons, African-Americans and Whites in North Carolina were pre-pared to allow segregated schools to continue. However, Whites vig-orously fought every effort made to implement the desegregationmandate.11 4 During this time, segregated African-American schoolscontinued their successful efforts to educate African-American chil-dren."' Where the litigation resources of the NAACP were available,a small number of parents joined lawsuits to challenge the continuingsegregation, but these cases usually involved a small number ofchildren.11 6

In spite of political deficiencies and inadequate resources, African-American educators were able to provide a quality education for theirstudents. The unfortunate result was that, as these students graduated,many continued to migrate away from North Carolina to locationswhere employment and professional opportunities were available andwhere they were not confronted by the same vehement level of state-sponsored racism that was present in North Carolina.1 17 This resultedin a "brain-drain" in the state as many of the brightest graduatesabandoned the State and made significant contributions elsewhere.

VI. CREATION OF THE PEARSALL COMMITTEE

An almost immediate response by the State of North Carolina tothe Brown I decision was the creation of the Pearsall Committee byGovernor William B. Umstead for the purpose of examining potentialproblems that might be encountered in North Carolina as a result ofthe Brown I decision." The Pearsall Committee, which includedthree African-Americans, concluded that the mixing of the racescould not be accomplished in North Carolina and that the Stateshould not attempt to comply with the Brown I mandate." 9 Instead,the Committee recommended that the State of North Carolina seek toemploy remedial means to comply with the requirements without al-

114. Supra, note 83.115. Id.116. See generally Douglas, supra note 33 (providing that attacks on the NAACP and its

members "undermined the willingness of black plaintiffs to step forward and pursue legal reme-dies" such that the NAACP brought only eleven desegregation lawsuits in North Carolina by1960).

117. See Great Migration: The African-American Exodus North, supra note 38.118. Douglas, supra note 33, at 107.119. Id. at 108.

2013]1 179

20




tering the state's segregated structure.12 0 As a way of making legalactions to achieve desegregation more difficult, the Committee recom-mended that control of local schools be transferred from the state tolocal county boards of education. 12 1 This legislative ploy would re-quire law suits challenging segregated schools to be filed in everycounty in order for the federal courts to be able to compel statewidecompliance with the Brown I mandate.12 2 Other proposals were alsomade which would provide alternative approaches for Whites opposedto desegregation. 1 2 3

Following the unexpected death of Governor Umstead and beforeBrown II was decided in May 1955, Governor Luther H. Hodges suc-cessfully urged the North Carolina General Assembly to enact laws toimplement the Pearsall Committee's recommendations. 124 In 1955, theNorth Carolina General Assembly enacted legislation that removedall racial references from the state's school law and divested the StateDepartment of Public Instruction of any authority and power over anyof the county and city schools. 125 In 1956, they enacted laws that pro-vided funds to White citizens to assist them in paying for the educa-tion of their children in segregated private schools if they werecompelled to attend a desegregated school and that authorized anylocal school board to suspend the operation of its public schools ifdesegregation was forced upon it by the federal courts. 1 2 6 These provi-sions were adopted as amendments to the North Carolina State Con-stitution in September 1956 when North Carolina citizens voted by amargin of four to one to maintain racial segregation in the state's pub-lic schools.127 These provisions were declared unconstitutional by thefederal court in Godwin v. Johnston County Board of Education.128

The state then created a "freedom of choice" plan, which allowedparents to petition their local school board to admit their children to a

120. See id. at 108-09.121. Id. at 108; see also An Act to Provide for the Enrollment of Pupils in Public Schools, ch.

366, § 1, 1955 N.C. Sess. Laws 309, 309-10 (providing that the North Carolina General Assem-bly gave complete control over student assignments to local school boards on March 30, 1955).

122. Douglas, supra note 33, at 110.123. See Chapter Three: A New Era in Education & Expansion and Improvement, N.C. ST.

BOARD EDUCATION, http://stateboard.ncpublicschools.gov/about-sbe/history/chapter-three (lastvisited Feb. 21, 2013).

124. See Douglas, supra note 33, at 108-09.125. See id. at 109.126. Id. at 112.127. Pearsall Plan Challenge Expected, CAROLINA TIMEs (Durham, N.C.), at 1, available at

http://library.digitalnc.org/cgi-bin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/newspapers&CISOPTR=64687&CISOMODE=print; see also County Voters Favor Pearsall Plan by Over 5-1, THE DISPATCH(Lexington, N.C.), Sept. 10, 1956, at 1, available at http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ZHQbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=11AEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6032,3891547&dq=nc+adopts+pearsall+plan+by+4+to+1&hl=en.

128. Godwin v. Johnston Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 301 F.Supp. 1339, 1343 (E.D.N.C. 1969).

21




previously segregated school.129 If successful, the parent had to pro-vide for the student's transportation to and from school. 13 0 This planalso provided that White parents who opposed a decision to admit anAfrican-American child could receive state tuition aid for the Whitechild to attend a private school of their choice if that child could notbe "conveniently" placed in a non-segregated public school.13 1

VII. DESEGREGATION UNDER FREEDOM OF CHOICE

During 1955 through 1967, token desegregation was attemptedwhere a small number of African-Americans were allowed entry intoa previously all-White school. 132 These admissions followed the pro-cess that was created by the Pearsall Committee's "freedom ofchoice" plan, which allowed for any African-American or White stu-dent to voluntarily enroll in an opposite race school.13 3 As the federalcourts in other states struck down these plans, North Carolina soughtto adjust and devise other plans and schemes to avoid desegregation.Finally, the State exhausted its ploys and pretenses and, around 1970,began an effort to desegregate all of its schools.1 3 4

For those African-American children who were initially placed onthe frontline of the desegregation struggle and sought to enter all-White schools under the State's Freedom of Choice statute, the exper-iences were traumatic and caused deep and lasting wounds. It is to beremembered that the children had to suffer through the abusive con-duct that was inflicted upon them in the name of desegregation.13 5

129. See Coppedge v. Franklin Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 273 F. Supp. 289, 298 (E.D.N.C. 1967)aff'd, 394 F.2d 410 (4th Cir. 1968) (providing that "authorities in North Carolina generally haveselected the 'freedom of choice' method for desegregating" schools ).

130. Id. at 300 ("Every student must be transported to the school to which he is assigned, ifthat school is sufficiently distant from his home to make him eligible for transportation undergenerally applicable transportation rules.").

131. See Douglas, supra note 33, at 112.132. See Brock Historical Museum of Greensboro Coll., Desegregation, J.C. PRICE SCH.,

http://museum.greensboro.edu/jcpriceschool/desegregation.php (last visited Feb. 21, 2013).133. Session 3: Tear Down These Walls: 1954-1980, N.C. MUSEUM HISTORY, http://

ncmuseumofhistory.org/workshops/civilrightsl/Session3.html (last visited Feb. 19, 2013).134. See id. (providing that the Pearsall Committee's plan was found to be unconstitutional

by a federal court in 1969 and that desegregation of public schools in North Carolina began bythe 1970s).

135. See e.g., Peter Wallenstein, Youngest Combatants of the Second Civil War: Black Chil-dren on the Front Lines of Public School Desegregation, NEWSL. Soc'Y FOR HIST. CHILD. &YouTH (H-Net), Summer 2004, available at http://www.h-net.org/-child/newsletters/newsletter4/Wallenstein3.html (providing that fifteen-year-old Dorothy Counts withdrew from the all-WhiteHarding High School in Charlotte, North Carolina, after four days of attendance because she waspit on by other students, ignored by teachers, targeted in trash throwing incidents, and enduredracial slurs and threats); Kevin Sack, For Civil Rights Pioneer, A Life of Quiet Struggle, L.A.TIMES, May 9, 2004, available at http://articles.latimes.com/2004/may/09/nation/na-josephine9(noting that the children were the foot soldiers of the movement rather than the preachers andlawyers who initiated the movement).

2013] 181

22




While the NAACP lawyer promoted and litigated the cases, and someparents volunteered to offer their children as sacrifices, not one of thechildren attended one day in a desegregated school. As this first waveof brave sacrificial African-American students enrolled in segregatedschools, they did not have the presence or protection of African-American teachers. The "freedom of choice" plan was only an oppor-tunity for students to transfer to segregated schools. 136 African-Amer-ican teachers were not a part of that mix; as such, when the studentsentered the segregated schools, they were on their own and could notrely upon White teachers or Principals, who did not want them in theirschools anyway, to protect them.

In LaGrange, like in many African-American communities in therural eastern portion of the State of North Carolina, no children orparents sought to enroll in an all-White school. 137 As such, student lifeat Frink High School continued unabated. Many parents and teachersfelt that efforts by African-American parents to enroll their childrenin the all-White schools were elitist, disrespectful, arrogant and consti-tuted treason to the African-American community.38 Others felt thatit was important to challenge the school board to comply with theprevailing desegregation mandate, but did not want to endanger theexistence of African-American schools. 139 Nevertheless, many of thesmall town rural residents were also acutely aware of what was hap-pening to those African-American children who sought and succeededin gaining admission to an all-White school. That story was not en-couraging and resulted in a lot of: "I told you so" and "What did theyexpect."

Among the first children to become a focus in this struggle was Jo-seph Holt, Jr. who was involved in the early effort by his parents totransfer from Raleigh's Ligon High School, the African-Americanschool, which was highly regarded around the State, to the all-WhiteBroughton High School.140 The Holt transfer struggle began in thesummer of 1957 when Holt's parents, pursuant to the Pupil Assign-ment Act, filed a petition to allow their son to enter the all-White

136. See Jefferson Currie II, With Deliberate Speed: North Carolina and School Desegrega-tion, N.C. MUSEUM HISTORY, http://www.ncmuseumofhistory.org/collateral/articles/FO4.deliber-ate.speed.pdf (2005) (providing that the freedom of choice system allowed students to attend theschool of their choice).

137. Supra, note 83.138. Id.139. Id.140. Heather K. McEntarfer, Catching Hell: The Joe Holt Integration Story, TERRAIN.ORG,

http://www.terrain.org/essays/22/mcentarfer.htm (last visited Feb. 22, 2013); see also N.C. StateUniv., Background Information: An Historically Black High School, LIVING AND LEARNING ATLIGON HIGH SCHOOL, http://www.ncsu.edu/ligon/about/history/esri/P7312.htm (last visited Feb.22, 2013) (noting that Ligon High School was Raleigh's premiere high school and attracted thecity's best and brightest African-American teachers).

23




Broughton High School.14 1 The petition resulted in the RaleighSchool Board refusing, by a five to one vote to allow Holt, a fifteen-year-old, to enter the school.1 2 At the time, the school board wascomposed of only one African-American, Attorney Fred Carnage. 14 3

In spite of the vocal dissent of Attorney Carnage, White Board mem-bers voted against the admissions application.1 44 Legal efforts by theHolt family to challenge the decision in federal court ended unsuc-cessfully when the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor ofthe school board.14 5

In Charlotte, fifteen-year-old Dorothy Counts successfully peti-tioned the Charlotte School Board to allow her to attend the all-WhiteHarding High School.14 6 In September 1957, Counts entered theschool in the midst of a large number of jeering White students whospat, threw trash and yelled racial epithets at her.1 47 The brutal attacksupon Counts continued once she was in the school building and, aftera week of this torment, Counts was withdrawn when her parents wereinformed by school officials and local police that they could not guar-antee Counts's safety if she remained in school.1 48 As a result, Countsrelocated to Philadelphia where she was able to graduate from a de-segregated high school. 14 9

In 1957, six African-American students, led by Josephine Boyd, en-tered the all-White schools in Greensboro.15 0 Boyd was admitted toGreensboro Senior High School as a transfer student from James B.Dudley High School.15 ' The other five students entered Gillespie Ele-

141. McEntarfer, supra note 140.142. Holt v. Raleigh City Bd. of Educ., 164 F. Supp. 853, 856, 858-59 (E.D.N.C. 1958).143. See Raney Stanford, Naming of Negro Lawyer to School Board Well Received in Tar

Heel Capital City, RALEIGH TIMES, May 26, 1949, available at http://web.co.wake.nc.us/leelncbios/ncbios a-c/carnage/19490526nonl/1 9490526nonl.htm; see also An Act to Provide for Elec-tion of Members of the Raleigh City School Administrative Unit and to Fix Their Terms ofOffice, ch. 856, § 1, 1963 N.C. Sess. Laws 1038, 1038-39 (providing the composition of the Ra-leigh City School Board and noting that Carnage was still a member in 1963).

144. Holt, 164 F. Supp. at 860-61.145. Holt v. Raleigh City Bd. of Educ., 265 F.2d 95, 98 (4th Cir. 1959).146. See, e.g., Youngest Combatants of the Second Civil War: Black Children on the Front

Lines of Public School Desegregation, supra note 135.147. Id.148. Where Are They Now?: Dorothy Counts, CHARLOTIE MAGAZINE, (Aug. 2010), http://

www.charlottemagazine.com/Charlotte-Magazine/August-2010/Where-are-They-Now/Dorothy-Counts/.

149. Id.150. Karen Hawkins, Desegregation and Integration of Greensboro's Public Schools, 1954-

1974, CIVIL RIGIrrs GREENSBORO, http://library.uncg.edu/dp/crg/topicalessays/schooldeseginteg.aspx#_ftnref6 (last visited Feb. 22, 2013).

151. Lynn W. Zimmerman, Reflections on Brown: Still Separate and Still Unequal?, 33 AM.EDUC. HIST. J. 89, 91 (2006) (noting that although Josephine Boyd endured obscene phone calls,she graduated in the top ten percent of her class at Greensboro Senior High School); see alsoGrimsley Senior High School, GUILFORD COUNTY SCHOOLS, http://www.gcsnc.comleducation/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=77333&linkid=nav-menu-container-4-

2013] 183

24




mentary School.' 52 At the time, James B. Dudley High School, theAfrican-American school, was one of ten schools in the state that hadattained state accreditation and was considered to be one of the besthigh schools in the country.153 Dudley also had a widely held reputa-tion as having some of the best teachers in the state. 154

Boyd's mother, who was six months pregnant, walked her to theschool's entrance.15 5 As they walked to the entrance, White studentslined both sides of the walkway and Boyd was subjected to racial slursand taunts.156 Once inside Greensboro Senior High School, Boyd wascontinually subjected to considerable ridicule, taunts and abuse as stu-dents spit on her food or dumped ketchup and other substances in herlap.s' She experienced threats and physical assaults.'5 8 On one occa-sion when she responded to a physical assault directed against her, ateacher warned her that she would be sent home if there was anotherconfrontation since she was the aggressor.1 59 Despite the hostile envi-ronment, Boyd stayed at the school for that year and graduated withhonors.160 Along the way, she was befriended by four White femalestudents who, despite suffering considerable abuse from fellow stu-dents, sought to support her during her enrollment at the school.16 '

In 1963, over 200 African-American students were enrolled in all-White schools in Greensboro compared to the nineteen African-Americans who had attended such schools during the years immedi-ately following Boyd's enrollment.162 During this period, the vast ma-jority of African-American students continued to attend Dudley HighSchool. 63

In 1960, the parents of seven-year-old William Campbell success-fully petitioned the Raleigh School Board to admit Campbell to the

1264561 (last visited Mar. 14, 2013) (providing that in 1962, the school's name was changed fromGreensboro Senior High School to Grimsley Senior High School).

152. Hawkins, supra note 150.153. See id.154. See id. ("Dudley High School .. enjoyed a reputation for having excellent teachers

who inspired pride, instilled self-respect, and promoted awareness of racial issues."); see alsoWILLIAM H. CHAFE, CIVILITIES AND CIVIL RIGHTS: GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA AND THE

BLACK STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM 23 (1980).155. Kevin Sack, A Brown v. Board Pioneer Tells Her Story, AFRICANAMERICA.ORG, (May

9, 2004, 9:20 PM), http://www.africanamerica.org/displayForumTopic/content/128788938051479360.

156. Id.157. Id.158. Id.159. Sack, supra note 155.160. Zimmerman, supra note 151, at 91 (noting that Josephine Boyd graduated in the top ten

percent of her class at Senior High School in Greensboro).161. Sack, supra note 155; see also Sean Alfano, Bravery in the Face of Bigotry, CBS EVE-

NING NEWS (Feb. 11, 2009, 6:37 PM), http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500617_162-1482625.html.162. Hawkins, supra note 150.163. See id.

25




Murphey Elementary School.164 When Campbell entered the schoolin September 1960,petitions circulated opposing his enrollment.' 6 5

Campbell was the only African-American student at the school for thenext five years and was verbally taunted and physically abused duringthis time.166

In Kinston, North Carolina, the town adjacent to LaGrange, twelve-year-old Greg Hannibal became one of the first African-Americans togain admission to the all-White Grainger High School in 1963.167 Hisparents, who moved to the United States from the West Indies andbecame civil rights activists in Kinston, fought for his admission be-cause they thought he would get a better education at that school.16 8

Hannibal remembered waking up each morning hearing the local ra-dio announcer enticing people to attack him and his family.169 As hewalked to school, people would drive by and splash water on him, orallow their dogs to attack him as he made his way to school. 170 Hanni-bal recalled teachers who would not speak to him or call on him inclasses when he raised his hand to participate in class discussions.' 7 'Even though he begged his parents to remove him from the school, hewas forced to endure the torment for three years until his gradua-tion.172 In hindsight, Hannibal said that he would not wish his experi-ence on anybody's child.173

During the twelve years in which the "freedom of choice" plan wasin effect, in one form or another, no documented White studentssought admission to a previously segregated African-American schooland only a few African-Americans petitioned to be admitted to previ-ously all-White schools. 174 It is easy to understand why African-Amer-ican students were reluctant to venture into the all-White schools,since the vast majority of students were satisfied with the educationalexperiences at segregated African-American schools. The few Afri-

164. Crabtree & Owens, supra note 110.165. Thomas Goldsmith & T. Keung Hui, School Integration Enters its 50th year, RALEIGH

NEWS & OBSERVER, Sept. 6, 2010, available at http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/06/667066/school-integration-enters-its.html.

166. Id.167. Jonathan Rodriguez, Kingston Man Reflects on Integration Into Lenoir County Schools,

WNCT (Feb. 7, 2012, 5:37 PM), http://www.wnct.com/story/21010332/kinston-man-reflects-on-in-tegration-into-lenoir-county-schools.

168. Id.169. Id.170. Id.171. Id.172. Id.173. Id.174. See School Desegregation and Equal Educational Opportunity, THE LEADERSHIP CON-

FERENCE, http://www.civilrights.org/resources/civilrightsl0l/desegregation.htm (last visited Dec.31, 2012) (noting that only "2.3 percent of African American children in the Deep South" at-tended schools that were integrated).

2013]1 185

26




can-American students who were admitted to all-White schools pri-marily resided in the more urban cities like Greensboro, Raleigh, 76

Rocky Mount, 7 7 Wilmington 7 s Charlotte"' and Winston-Salem' 80.The utilization of the "freedom of choice" plan was not an issue inrural areas or smaller towns within the state like LaGrange, Kinstonand Goldsboro, the portion of the state in which the vast majority ofAfrican-Americans resided."'

Spurred on by the NAACP, several lawsuits were filed in local juris-dictions to contest the slow pace of desegregation. These challengesinvolved several counties and towns across the State.' 8 2 In each in-stance, the Freedom of Choice statute was attacked. These time-con-suming legal actions were filed in: Anson County' 83, BladenCounty'8 4 , Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools' 5 , Cumberland County'8 6 ,Edgecombe County'17 , Guilford County 88 , Jones County 89 , Nash-Rocky Mount Schoolso90, New Hanover County' 91, NorthamptonCounty'9 2 , Union County' and Wilson County'9 4 . Legal attacks werealso launched in Bertie' 5 , Franklin' 9 6 and Pitt 97 counties. In each of

175. See, e.g., Hawkins, supra note 150.176. See, e.g., McEntarfer, supra note 107.177. See, e.g., Murray, supra note 108 (Providing that "tentative steps toward integration

took place in 1963" at Rocky Mount Senior High School when the very first African-Americanstudents chose to attend Rocky Mount Senior High School under the Freedom of Choice law.For the next few years, the student population included small numbers of black students whilethe vast majority continued to attend Booker T. Washington High School until the two schoolsmerged in 1969.").

178. See, e.g., Graham, supra note 108.179. Dan L. Morrill, The Emergence of Diversity: African Americans, Charlotte-Mecklen-

burg Historic Landmarks Commission, http://www.cmhpf.org/Morrill%20Book/CH12.htm (lastvisited Dec. 28, 2012) (Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools integrated for the first time in September4, 1957 by Dorothy Counts).

180. Five Communities: Their Search for Equal Education, United States Commission onCivil Rights Clearinghouse Publication 37, 1 (Dec. 1972).

181. As a former resident of the small town of LaGrange, I could attest to several conversa-tions between my classmates and our parents in which the "freedom of choice" plan was notdiscussed and, therefore, was not at issue.

182. There are legal challenges in fifteen counties of record across the state. These challengesare discussed in footnotes 183-198.

183. Singleton v. Anson Cnty Bd. of Educ., 283 F. Supp. 895, 896 (W.D.N.C. 1968).184. See Smith v. N.C. State Bd. of Educ., 444 F.2d 6 (4th Cir. 1971).185. Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 402 U.S. 1 (1971).186. Ford v. Cumberland Cnty Bd. of Educ. (1964).187. See Smith, 444 F.2d 6.188. See id189. U.S. v. Jones Cnty Bd. of Educ., 295 F. Supp. 640 (E.D.N.C. 1968).190. See Smith, 444 F.2d 6.191. Eaton v. New Hanover Cnty Bd. of Educ., 459 F.2d 684 (4th Cir. 1972).192. U.S. v. Northhampton Bd. of Educ. (1967).193. See Smith, 444 F.2d 6.194. Whitley v. Wilson City Bd. of Educ., 427 F.2d 179 (4th Cir. 1970).195. U.S. v. Bertie Cnty Bd. of Educ., 293 F. Supp. 1276 (E.D.N.C. 1968).196. Coppedge v. Franklin Cnty Bd. of Educ., 273 F. Supp. 289 (E.D.N.C. 1967).

27




these cases, only a small number of African-American students soughtadmission to all-White schools.198

The "freedom of choice" plan applied only to the ability of studentsto transfer to an all-White school. At no point was there an effort toallow African-American teachers or Principals to transfer to one ofthose schools. This opportunity for student transfers always left themwithout a person of their race who was close by in order to advise andprotect them from the many dangers that lurched within those all-White schools. These dangers were many and were liberally thrustupon the defenseless African-American child.

In 1968, the "freedom of choice" plan was declared unconstitu-tional."9 By 1970, the North Carolina school districts had exhaustedall legal options to avoid desegregation and deliberately chose to ex-act its revenge for this loss upon African-American schools andstudents.

VIII. SWANN V. CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG LITIGATION

Frustrated with the slow pace of desegregation, some Charlotte par-ents, under the direction of the NAACP, sued the Charlotte-Mecklen-burg school system in 1965.200 After a series of hearings, whichconsumed five years, the District Court for the Western District ofNorth Carolina ordered the school system to produce a plan thatpromised to realistically provide for student and faculty desegrega-tion.2 01 When the school board's proposed plan was deemed unsatis-factory, District Court Judge James McMillan appointed an expert todraft a plan.2 02 The plan adopted by the District Court, and finallyapproved by the U.S. Supreme Court, redistributed African-Americanstudents from the inner city into the previously all-Whites schoolsbased on a desired ratio of 71% White students and 29% African-American.2 3 The District Court further ordered that: "no school(should) be operated with an all-[B]lack or predominantly [B]lack stu-dent body, (and) (t)hat pupils of all grades (should) be assigned insuch a way that as nearly as practicable the various schools at various

197. Teel v. Pitt Cnty Bd. of Educ., 272 F.Supp. 703 (E.D.N.C. 1967).198. Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 402 U.S. 1, 5-6 (1971) (where the court

combined five cases).199. Boomer v. Beaufort Cnty Bd. of Educ., 294 F. Supp. 179, 182 (E.D.N.C. 1968).200. Swann, 402 U.S. at 7.201. Id. at 1, 13.202. Id. at 8; see also Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 311 F. Supp. 265

(W.D.N.C. 1970) (where District Court Judge James McMillan appointed Dr. John A. Finger toadvise the court how schools could be desegregated).

203. Swann, 402 U.S. at 23-24.

2013] 187

28




grade levels have about the same proportion of [B]lack and [W]hitestudents." 20 4

With respect to the issue of all or predominately one race schools,the Swann Court made clear that the "existence of some small numberof one-race, or virtually one-race, schools within a district is not in andof itself the mark of a system that still practices segregation by law." 2 05

The Court warned, however that where the operation of one-raceschools continued, the school board had a burden of showing that thestudent assignments were "genuinely nondiscriminatory." 20 6 "Thecourt should scrutinize such schools, and the burden upon the schoolauthorities will be to satisfy the court that their racial composition isnot the result of present or past discriminatory action on theirpart." 207

Consequences of Swann

Frink, like other segregated schools in North Carolina, celebratedits last high school graduation with the class of 1970.208 That graduat-ing class ended the existence of virtually every segregated African-American high school in the State. Each of these schools, whether itwas C. H. Darden Middle School in Wilson 2 0 9 ; Williston in Wilming-ton 2 10 ; J.T. Barber in New Bern 2 1 1 ; Dillard 2 1 2 , Norwayne 2 1 3 ; Ligon 2 1 4

in Raleigh; Adkin 2 15 in Kinston; Carver 2 16 in Mount Olive and manymore schools, which had stellar academic reputations and accomplish-

204. Id. at 23.205. Id. at 26.206. Id.207. Id.208. See The History of E.B. Frink High School, supra note 28 (noting E.B. Frink as a High

School from 1951-1970). .209. See History of Charles H. Darden Middle School, CHARLES H. DARDEN MIDDLE

SCHOOL, http://www.edline.net/pages/DardenMiddle/AboutUs/History-of Charles H_DardenM (last visited Mar. 15, 2013).

210. See generally WILLISTON SCHOOL OF MATH, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, http://www.nhcs.net/williston/ (last visited Mar. 15, 2013).

211. See generally J.T. BARBER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, http://www.craven.kl2.nc.us/jtb/ (lastvisited Mar. 15, 2013).

212. DILLARD/GOLDSBORO ALUMNI AND FRIENDS, http://dgafinc.org/about-us.html (last vis-ited Mar. 15, 2013) (noting that Dillard High School closed in 1969 and was reopened as DillardMiddle School for the seventh and eighth grade).

213. See generally NORWAYNE MIDDLE SCHOOL, http://www.waynecountyschools.org/360(last visited Mar. 15, 2013).

214. See generally LIGON GT MAGNET MIDDLE SCHOOL, http://ligon.wcpss.net/ (last visitedMar. 15, 2013).

215. KINSTON HIGH SCHOOL, http://schools.lenoir.kl2.nc.us/khs/About%20KHS.html (lastvisited Mar. 15, 2013) (noting that the integrated Kinston High School opened in 1970 as aconsolidation of the all-White Grainger High School and the Historically Black Adkin HighSchools).

216. CARVER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, http://www.waynecountyschools.org/domain/320 (lastvisited Dec. 29, 2012) (changed from Carver High School to Carver Elementary School).

29




ments, were either eliminated or downgraded to junior high schools.Exceptions to this rule were Hillside High School217 in Durham,James B. Dudley218 in Greensboro and Carver High School219 in Win-ston-Salem.

These schools had regularly graduated strong cadres of loyal, sup-portive, highly educated, gifted and committed students who madesignificant contributions to the development and growth of North Car-olina and the United States. The objective successes of the many Afri-can-American schools were meaningless when confronted with theraw racism of the day simply because Whites depreciated the value ofanything connected with African-Americans and their schools. ForAfrican-Americans, structural deficiencies, if they existed, or inade-quate resources were not fatal because the educational communitystayed focused on the delivery of a high quality education no matterthe cost.

The desegregation campaign implemented by the state and localschool districts employed the intentional and abhorrent strategy of to-tally destroying virtually everything connected to the existence of pre-viously segregated African-American schools. With rare exceptions,the African-American school designations along with the school's his-tory and culture were totally destroyed and replaced with a new name,logo, student bodies and educational purposes. The rare exceptionsoccurred in those cities where African-Americans wielded some mini-mal level, yet significant semblance of political clout. The leadershipof those communities forced the local school boards to continue to usethe previously segregated African-American school's structure andname as a high school. This occurred primarily in urban cities withlarger population bases such as in Durham with Hillside, Carver inWinston-Salem and Dudley in Greensboro. 22 0 But, for the most part,in the other politically powerless communities, the funeral cortege andmusic were played for those African-American schools.

For example, at Frink, the school's building and name continued tobe used, but it was downgraded to a junior high school (later, this waschanged to a middle school) and the Principal, teachers and staff were

217. HILLSIDE HIGH SCHOOL, http://www.hillside.dpsnc.net/department-pages/school-profile(last visited Mar. 15, 2013).

218. See generally DUDLEY HIGH ScHooL, http://www.gcsnc.com/education/school/school.php?sectionid=11 (last visited Mar. 15, 2013).

219. See generally CARVER HIGH ScHooL, http://www.wsfcs.kl2.nc.us/chs (last visited Mar.15, 2013).

220. See generally Choices Mean Changes for Hillside, NCCU Connection, TiHE DURHAM

NEWS, http://www.thedurhamnews.com/2010/09/18/v-print/203607/choices-mean-changes-for-hillside.html (last visited 3/1/13) (listing Black high schools as feeder schools to North Carolina'sHistorically Black Colleges and Universities).

2013] 189

30




fired, transferred or demoted.221 In addition, its mascot, logo, year-books, history and records of achievements were completely de-stroyed and discarded.222 At Frink, all of the school's trophies andplaques were removed from display cases and tossed into the gar-bage.223 In other locations, the school's name did not remain in anyform and those schools and their histories were simply eliminated.224

In so many of those instances, the African-American Principals andteachers possessed superior academic credentials than did their Whitecounter-parts. Teaching ability was, of course, a subjective decisionand that subjectivity always inured to the benefit of the White Princi-pals and teachers.

In his seminal study of the Hyde County, North Carolina desegrega-tion struggle, David Cecelski confirmed this widespread and system-atic strategy by White political leaders to totally dismantle any tracesof the history, culture, accomplishments and existence of the African-American schools.225 Blacks lost important symbols of their educa-tional heritage in this process. "When [B]lack schools closed, theirnames, mascots, mottos, holidays, and traditions were sacrificed withthem, while the students were transferred to historically [W]hiteschools that retained those markers of cultural and racial identity." 226

When former Black high schools did not shut down, they were invaria-bly converted into integrated junior high schools or elementaryschools.227 White officials would frequently change the names given tothe school buildings by the Black community and would remove pla-ques or monuments that honored Black cultural, political, or educa-tional leaders.228 They hid from public view trophy cases featuringBlack sports teams and academic honorees and replaced the names ofBlack sports teams with those used by the White schools. 22 9 The depthof White resistance lay in the flames of the dozens of these schoolsthat were put to the torch as desegregation approached.

These acts affirmed what African-Americans had always suspectedwould happen if desegregation was to occur and caused a sense ofmistrust and fear to concretize in their minds. Trust, a basic proposi-tion that African-Americans had in their schools, was destroyed along

221. Mewborn, supra note 77.222. Id.223. Id.224. Id.225. DAVID S. CECELSKI, ALONG FREEDOM ROAD: HYDE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA AND

THE FATE OF BLACK SCHOOLS IN THE SOUTH 7-8 (1994).226. Id. at 9.227. Id. at 162 (the Hyde County School Board decided to keep the names of the 0. A. Peay

School and the Davis School).228. Mewborn, supra note 77.229. Id.

31




with the dedicated and committed personnel who felt and acted as ifthey were entrusted with the development, care and future of the chil-dren, which they were sworn to educate. The almost total destructionof the segregated African-American schools destroyed that bond ofsupport, which African-Americans had with the school system, andthat sense of trust has never been restored. No longer did African-Americans trust the school system to promote and guide the educa-tional development of their children and they realized the reality thatthey were being totally removed from any direct involvement in howtheir children would be educated.

Desegregation Experiences After Swann:

The primary principle that guided the desegregation of the schoolswas that Whites were not going to stand idly by and allow African-Americans to be in positions to exert any control over them, theirinstitutions and their children. That principle is reflected in every deci-sion North Carolina school boards made as they sought to complywith the North Carolina desegregation mandate. These decisions weremade possible because the opinion in Brown v. Board of Educationdid not direct how the elimination of segregation was to occur.230 Theopinion focused merely on the "so-called" larger constitutional visionand value that segregation violated Equal Protection and was to beeliminated "root and branch." 231 Neither the Supreme Court nor theNAACP attorneys imagined the extent to which White political lead-ers, elected school officials and citizens would go to in order to keepschool systems segregated. Clearly, Brown v. Board of Education be-came an empty victory for North Carolina's African-American com-munities, children, teachers and principals.

In every school district or jurisdiction, those students who lived inAfrican-American communities or attended racially segregatedschools were divided up pursuant to an arbitrary mathematicalformula and distributed to several different majority White schools, atevery educational level, where they constituted a distinct and visibleminority.23 2 To satisfy this distribution formula, buses were used totransport African-American children to schools in outlying whiteneighborhoods. In many instances, these children were bused pastthe closest school and forced to be transported an inordinate long dis-

230. See Brown v. Bd. of Educ. of Topeka, Kan., 349 U.S. 294, 300 (1955) (noting that a"prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance" for desegregation).

231. See Green v. County Bd. of New Kent Cnty., Va., 391 U.S. 430, 438 (1968).232. See generally BROCK HISTORICAL MUSEUM, supra note 132 (discussing how the City of

Greensboro's integration plan called for a 70/30 ratio of white to black in all public schools).233. Id.

2013]1 191

32




tance for the sake of achieving racial desegregation. 234 Busing hadbeen previously used when the schools were segregated except stu-dents were bused to the closest African-American school.235 Underthis newly developed desegregation model, buses transported African-American students away from their local communities into a previ-ously all-White school unlike similarly situated White students whowere only bused short distances to attend school if they were bused atall. 236

The widespread use of busing for the primary purpose of movingAfrican-Americans from their communities in order to provide a nu-merical mix of students began in Charlotte and was followed by otherschool districts in North Carolina. 237 This use of busing, the re-distri-bution of African-American students into majority White schoolsbased solely upon prescribed ratios, and the wholesale transfer of Af-rican-American teachers and Principals into these schools for the sakeof desegregation, was approved in Swann.23 8

IX. TREATMENT OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN TEACHERS AND

PRINCIPALS DURING DESEGREGATION

While there was considerable resistance by Whites to the transfer ofAfrican-American students into all-White schools, they were consid-erably more resistance to the idea that African-American teachersand Principals would be introduced into those schools. In her seminalwork, "Desegregating Teachers," Wake Forest University Law SchoolProfessor Wendy Parker reported that up through 1966, not one Afri-can-American teacher taught in a de jure White school even wherethese schools had admitted a few African-American students.239 Pro-fessor Parker's conclusions resulted from her study of the resistance ofschool boards from around the country to employ African-Americanteachers during and after the schools were desegregated. 24 0 Alongwith White parents, White and African-American teachers often pre-ferred to teach students who shared their race and ethnicity.241

234. Id.235. Id.236. Id.237. Liane Membis, Arrests Highlight Education Busing Issues, CNN (July 21, 2010, 2:30

PM), http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/07/19/ncschools.resegregation.rally/index.html (noting thatCharlotte-Mecklenburg was the first school system to implement busing as a means to achievedesegregation and was followed by Wake County in 1999).

238. See generally Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 402 U.S. 1 (1971) (uphold-ing busing as a means for promoting integration of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System).

239. Wendy Parker, Desegregating Teachers, 86 WASH. U. L. REV. 1, 9 (2008) (discussinghow teachers were segregated just like students).

240. See generally id. at 52 (discussing the resegregation of schools as applied to both stu-dents and teachers).

241. Id. at 13.

33




Equally as abhorrent to many Whites was the idea that an African-American Principal, mainly males, would be placed in a position ofsupervision and authority over a predominately White female teach-ing staff.24 2 "Resistance to [B]lack principals supervising white teach-ers [had] been far stronger than resistance to [B]lacks teaching whitestudents. When desegregation [came], [B]lack principals [were] fre-quently the first to go." 2 4 3

Professor Parker made the point that transferring African-Ameri-can teachers into all-White schools required "radical changes to manypeople's ideas about the racial and ethnic distribution of power andabout which teachers belonged where." 2 44 As was the thinking em-braced by many Whites, "[t]eaching [was] a position of authority, andsegregation was all about maintaining power and privilege for whites,including white children." 2 45 The very nature and entrenched thinkingregarding African-Americans caused White parents to doubt the com-petency of African-American teachers and supported their resistanceto giving these teachers power over their White children. 2 46

It was this vocal and persistent resistance that resulted in many Af-rican-American teachers losing their jobs. While this did not occur ona widespread basis at Frink High School, it was the experience inother portions of Lenoir County and in most other school districts inthe State. For example, in April 1971, officials at Department ofHealth, Education and Welfare (HEW) instituted administrative pro-ceedings against the Lenoir County School Board and its Superinten-dent H.H. Bullock as a result of the widespread firing of African-American teachers and the hiring of poorer qualified Whites.24 7 Theseproceedings were directed against an all-Republican school boardduring the administration of Republican President Richard Nixon andsought to terminate the board's receipt of federal funds.2 48

Because the teachers, who lost their jobs, lived primarily in smalland cohesive communities, news of their terminations and/or transferswas not well received in those communities. This treatment to whichAfrican-American teachers and Principals were subjected incensedthe community, but they knew that they were powerless to correctthem since they had little or no political power.2 49 In fact, many peo-

242. See generally William Jefferson, School Desegregation and the Black Teacher: A Searchfor Effective Remedies, 48 TUL. L. REV. 55, 63 (1973).

243. Id.244. Parker, supra note 239, at 12 (discussing teaching as a position of authority).245. Id.246. Id.247. See Herald-Journal Newspaper, April 16, 1971, p. 6.248. Id.249. See Adam Fairclough, Costs of Brown: Black Teachers and School Integration, 91 J. AM.

HIST. 43, 54 (2004) (discussing the firing or demotion of Black principals after integration).

2013] 193

34




ple expected this result and became disenchanted with the resultingdesegregated school districts knowing that the interests of and con-cerns for African-American students and community would not beprotected.2 5 0 The reality was that local White school boards, the courtsand NAACP attorneys did not protect these vulnerable teachers.25 1

It was estimated by one researcher that over 500 African-Americanteachers in North Carolina lost their teaching jobs in 1965.252 It wasalso estimated that in 17 desegregating states, 38,000 African-Ameri-cans lost teaching positions.2 53 With respect to African-Americanprincipals, it was estimated that 90% of them lost their jobs and theremainder were demoted down to assistant principals.2 54

David S. Cecelski, in his study of desegregation in Hyde County,North Carolina, determined:

From 1963 to 1970, the number of [B]lack principals in the state's ele-mentary schools plunged from 620 to only 170. Even more striking,209 [B]lack principals headed secondary schools in 1963, but less than10 still held that crucial job in 1970. By 1973, only three had survivedthis wholesale displacement.255

Cecelski also reported that "North Carolina was second only toTexas in the number of jobs lost by Black teachers: by 1972, an esti-mated 3,051 [B]lacks in North Carolina had lost teaching jobs afterthe merger of [B]lack and [W]hite schools." 2 5 6

In approving the wholesale racial re-distribution and rationing ofAfrican-American teachers into the several majority White schools,the Court sanctioned the destruction of a dedicated teaching core ofAfrican-American who had successfully guided and elevatedthousands of children into productive professional futures. The sanc-tioning of this re-distribution of teachers also resulted in the destruc-tion of core, proven and unique teaching methodologies that African-American teachers had developed and successfully used for decades insegregated African-American schools.25 7 An important part of thisteaching methodology involved the maintenance of discipline and the

250. Id.251. See generally id. (discussing resegregation and disillusionment with public schools).252. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., School Desegregation Problems in the South: An Historical Per-

spective, 54 MINN. L. REV. 1157, 1165 (1970).

253. Horizons of Opportunities: Celebrating 50 Years of Brown v. Board of Education, IN-FOUSA, http://infousa.state.gov/education/overview/brown-nea.html (last visited Mar. 15, 2013)(noting that more than 38,000 black educators lost their job between 1954 and 1965).

254. Russell W. Irvine & Jacqueline Jordan Irvine, The Impact of the Desegregation Processon the Education of Black Students: Key Variables, 52 J. NEGRO Eouc. 410, 417 (1983) (notingdesegregation's effect on the professional status of Black educators).

255. Cecelski, supra note 225, at 8.256. Id.257. Mewborn, supra note 77.

35




teaching of respect of authority.258 In their new teaching assignments,African-American teachers would find that those methods, which hadserved them well in the segregated schools, were no longer useful ordesired in teaching White children and were no longer available toteach African-American children.

X. STUDENTS' EXPERIENCES IN DESEGREGATED SCHOOLS

Once deposited into desegregated schools, African-American stu-dents found that they were not wanted or welcomed by White stu-dents or teachers. From the outset, the opportunities for thesestudents to participate in the ongoing activities at the school were se-verely restricted. 259 These restrictions also applied to the opportunityand privilege to participate in advanced academic classes and extra-curricular activities freely with White students. 260 Efforts by these stu-dents to protest their exclusion and class assignments were dismissedby White teachers and administrators and the few African-Americanteachers assigned to the school were powerless to intervene on thestudents' behalf.26 1

Not only were the students excluded from the total life of theschools, they became the target of physical attacks and were ostra-cized and punished when they dared to complain about the treatmentthat they received. 262 African-American students found that they wereindeed attending a desegregated school building, but, on the inside,they were merely re-segregated into classes with other members oftheir race.263 Students, who had formerly participated in student gov-ernment activities, participated in the band, the glee club, cheeringsquad or played basketball or football encountered significant resis-tance as White administrators intentionally prohibited or discouragedtheir participation.264 New rules were suddenly imposed which limitedparticipation to those students who satisfied a certain grade point av-erage or were enrolled in upper level academic classes.265 Usually, thestudents who satisfied these heightened requirements were White, al-though, in some instances, a token number of African-American stu-

258. Id.259. Mewborn, supra note 77.260. Id.261. Id.262. Id.263. Id.264. Alex Poinsett, Last of the "Wilmington 10", EBONY, June 1979, at 66, available at http://

books.google.com/books?id=sItfPJ3ZtdQC&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=School+segregation+in+New+Hanover+County,+North+Carolina&source.

265. Mewborn, supra note 77.

2013] 195

36




dents were chosen in order to give the appearance that theparticipants were being fairly chosen.26 6

For example, African-American students in New Hanover Countyparticipated in several demonstrations to protest the treatment andattitudes that they encountered when they entered the formerly all-White schools.2 67 While enrolled at Williston High School, the all Af-rican-American school, these students earned a statewide reputationand accolades for their academic, and athletic achievements and stu-dents were actively involved in extra-curricular and student govern-ment activities.26 8 When they entered the White schools, teachers andPrincipals sought to reserve these activities for White students andcreated rules and procedures which were designed to prohibit or se-verely limited participation by African-American students.26 9

When the students complained about and eventually protestedthese exclusions, they were quickly and publically disciplined, sus-pended and/or expelled. 27 0 Finally in February 1971, the students atseveral of the high schools walked out of the schools and marched tothe New Hanover County Board of Education to demonstrate theirdemands for equal and fair treatment.27 1

The New Hanover County school system was one of those that ag-gressively sought to maintain its segregated status and fought a relent-less battle in the courts to prevent the desegregation of its schools.When desegregation began in 1970, it began quickly, without signifi-cant planning and in response to a long series of court mandates,which dated back to 1968.272

African-American students in other counties and school districtshad similar experiences and suffered the same fate when they pro-tested their exclusion. Student protests occurred in Wilson, RockyMount, Goldsboro and other locales around the State.27 3

The African-American community did not vocally resist or rebelagainst this mockery of desegregation out of fear that oppositionwould be viewed as being "anti-desegregation," but this process of ra-

266. Id.267. Poinsett, supra note 264.268. Williston Senior High School-A Great School?, THE WILMINGTON JOURNAL, (Mar. 17,

2012), available at http://wilmingtonjournal.com/williston-senior-high-school-a-great-school/(noting that students at Williston Senior High School scored higher than expected by the super-intendant on a national test).

269. Mewborn, supra note 77.270. Poinsett, supra note 264, at 66271. Id.272. Eaton v. New Hanover Cnty. Bd. Of Educ., 330 F. Supp 78, 79 (1971).273. See, supra note 209 (Historically African-American Darden High School closed and

converted to a middle school); supra note 212 (Historically African-American Dillard HighSchool closed and converted to an elementary school) and supra note 214.

37




cial change concluded the destruction of African-American schoolsand began the non-education of African-American students. As a re-sult, a significant percentage of African-American students and par-ents lost faith in public education in North Carolina and in the fairnessand equality of the desegregation process. It became clear to many inthe African-American communities that their schools and children'seducational futures were sacrificed in the name of Brown v. Board ofEducation.

XI. THERE WAS RESISTANCE IN DURHAM

Every African-American community did not accept a decision bytheir school board to destroy their African-American school. For ex-ample in Durham, a politically impactful community, under the gui-dance of the Durham Community on the Affairs of Black People,successfully fought against the destruction of Hillside High School.274

Hillside was one of those African-American institutions that enjoyeda storied history and had produced graduates who made significantcontributions within North Carolina and around the country.

The Durham African-American community had a history of politi-cal activism, economic independence and a large stable, educated mid-dle class. It was the home of the North Carolina Mutual LifeInsurance Company, Mechanic and Farmers Bank and was consideredas the "Black Wall Street" of the south.275 Additionally, citizens fromthat community had regularly engaged in protest efforts to confrontvarious instances of racial discrimination throughout its history.276

In 1950, the City of Durham had twenty-two public schools.2 7 7 Ofthose schools, fourteen (14) were for White students and eight werefor African-Americans.278 Included in this number were two seniorhigh schools and three junior high schools, which enrolled 10,665students.279

274. See generally Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People.275. Mark Roberts, Durham Home to Original "Black Wall Street," WRAL (Feb. 25, 1999),

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/139037/.276. See, e.g., Violence Erupts During Durham, N.C., Protest; Negroes Demonstrate Over

Orangeburg, S. C., Deaths - Three Men Arrested, N.Y. TIMEs, Feb. 16, 1968 (200 Durhamresidents marching to protest the recent deaths of three African-American men in South Caro-lina); Over 1,200 Negroes Arrested in Greensboro and Durham, May 21, 1963, The Times-News,available at http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=sQoeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Qk4EAAAAIBAJ&pg=4461,1005637&dq=durham+protests&hl=en (More than 800 African-American protes-tors arrested during a city-wide sit-down in front of segregated restaurants).

277. Amanda Truelove, The History of Education in Durham, NC, 1950, DIGITAL DURHAM,1 (2011), available at http://www.duke.edu/web/digitaldurham/AmandaTruelove/1950DurhamSchoolsPaper.pdf.

278. Id. at 2.279. Id. at 1.

2013] 197

38




Soon after the Brown v. Board of Education decision, Civil Rightsattorney Floyd McKissick unsuccessfully sought to enroll his daughter,Jocelyn MsKissick, and Elaine Richardson, a classmate, in the segre-gated Durham High School.2 80 As a result of continuing political pres-sure, the Durham School Board relented in 1959 and allowed eightAfrican-American students to attend previously all-White schools.2 s'In 1960, Jocelyn McKissick and Henry Vickers became the first Afri-can-Americans to enroll in and graduate from Durham HighSchool.28 2 The other six African-American students were assigned totwo junior high schools.2 83 Despite this effort, only a few African-American students chose to follow their lead by enrolling in all-Whiteschools and no White student sought to enroll in one of the African-American schools.28 4

In response to the Freedom of Choice law enacted by the NorthCarolina General Assembly, the Durham School Board in 1965 ad-vised African-Americans that they could now attend any school in theCity and their requests to do so would be immediately honored.28 5

Nevertheless, it was not until 1970, following a successful lawsuit thatdesegregation began.2 8 6 By this time, the Durham population hadshifted and African-Americans constituted a significant political forcewithin the City. Not only did the African-American community haveconsiderable political clout, its young residents were aggressively chal-lenging every area of segregation that had been present in the City.287

With this background, it successfully halted efforts by the DurhamBoard of Education to destroy Hillside High School and re-distributeits students to previously all-White schools.2 8 8

Hyde County Resistance:

Without the political sophistication of Durham, the African-Ameri-can community of Hyde County also fought a successful battle to pre-

280. See McKissick v. Durham City Bd. Of Educ., 176 F. Supp. 3 (1959).281. Durham Civil Rights Heritage Project, DURHAM COUNTY LIBRARY, http://www.

durhamcountylibrary.org/dcrhp/timeline.php (last updated July 14, 2008).282. JEAN BRADLEY ANDERSON, DURHAM COUNTY: A HISTORY OF DURHAM COUNTY,

NORTH CAROLINA 434 (1990); see also Truelove, supra note 277, at 3-4 (noting a picture ofHenry Vickers being escorted into Carr Junior High School by Evelyn McKissick).

283. Truelove, supra note 277, at 3.284. Peter Wallenstein, Youngest Combatants of the Second Civil War: Black Children on the

Front Lines of Public School Desegregation, NEWSLETTER OF THE SOCIETY FOR THE HISTORY OFCHILDREN AND YOUTH, Summer 2004, available at http://www.h-net.org/-child/newsletters/newsletter4/Wallenstein6.html.

285. Anderson, supra note 282.286. See Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 402 U.S. 1 (1971) (holding that

state-imposed segregation needs to be eliminated).287. See, e.g., supra note 281.288. Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People.

39




vent the destruction of its African-American high schools. Led byGolden Frinks, the field secretary for the North Carolina chapter ofthe Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), that commu-nity organized itself to resist the school board's efforts to close its twoAfrican-American schools, Peay and Davis.2 8 9

Soon after the 1964 Civil Rights Act was signed, HEW began topress the Hyde County School Board to desegregate its schools.29 0 Inresponse, the school board enacted a "freedom of choice" plan, but noWhite students enrolled in the African-American schools and only afew African-American students enrolled in the all-White schools. 2 9 1

Those students who enrolled were confronted by aggressive efforts,led by the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), to discourage African-Americansfrom attending the White schools.2 92 The Klan held public rallies, con-ducted night raids, issued death threats to African-Americans andphysically intimidated those few Whites who favored desegregation.

In 1965, twenty-one (21) African-American students crossed theline and enrolled at the all-White school, Mattamuskeet HighSchool.29 3 It became clear immediately that they were not welcomedas White students harassed them and White teachers ignored and sup-ported efforts to intimidate the African-American students. As a re-sult, some of the African-American students performed poorlyacademically and were expelled from school when they sought relieffrom the violence and intimidation that was directed toward them.29 4

It is reported that one student who stayed home from school to avoidthis harassment by Whites was expelled for truancy.29 5 In the 1966-1967 academic year, only seven African-Americans attended Mat-tamuskeet High School and this number decreased to three for the

2961967-1968 academic year.In 1968, HEW Officials sought to cut off federal funding to the

school district and this threat convinced the school board to agree to afull desegregation plan, which called for the closing of both African-

289. Cecelski, supra note 225, at 130.290. Tear Down These Walls: 1954-1980, NORTH CAROLINA MUSEUM OF HISTORY, http://

ncmuseumofhistory.org/workshops/civilrightsl/Session3.html (last visited Mar. 18, 2013).291. Id. (eighty-five percent of Black students continued attending historically Black schools

and no White students sought to transfer to those schools).292. Cecelski, supra note 225, at 41.293. See Cecelski, supra note 225, at 33 (detailing Hyde County's desegregation struggle).294. Background Essay: Hyde County School Boycott, TEACHERS' DOMAIN, http://www.

teachersdomain.org/resource/viewtext-printer friendly/resource/2827 (last visited Mar. 18,2013); see also Cecelski, supra note 225, at 35 (discussing Black students' performance belowtheir abilities and uncharacteristic disciplinary problems).

295. Background Essay: Hyde County School Boycott, supra note 294; Cecelski, supra note225, at 35.

296. Wallenstein, supra note 284.

2013] 199

40




American high schools. 297 When the African-American communitylearned of this plan, they appealed to the local school board and whenthe school board refused to re-consider the plan, an appeal was di-rected to HEW.2 98 HEW refused to intervene.2 9 9 In response, thecommunity organized a boycott of the schools, which lasted for theentire 1968-1969 academic year.3 0 0

During that year, parents and students engaged in sit-ins at theboard of education and the local courthouse, and organized marches,which resulted in the arrests of large numbers of parents and stu-dents. 3 0 1 These protests resulted in a decision by the school board in1969 to keep Peay and Davis High Schools open.302 Thereafter, theAfrican-American community's leadership worked with the localboard to devise an acceptable plan to desegregate.30 3 A major part ofthis desegregation plan was created by a biracial committee of stu-dents and faculty who worked together to shape a plan, which in-volved every aspect of the school's life, and insured equality ofopportunity for all of the students.3 04 For example, if a White studentran for student government president, he or she had to have an Afri-can-American vice presidential candidate and vice-versa.305

Although, African-Americans were able to prevail in the short-termin Hyde County, the long-term results were as devastating as it was inother parts of North Carolina.

Like Lenoir County, where Frink High School is located, the HydeCounty School Board was all-White and had no interest in placatingthe restless, and by now resistant African-Americans, by seeking toappease them in any way. Because they had the power to do so, Whiteschool officials, administrators, teachers and students were deter-mined to make African-Americans pay dearly for the perceived vic-tory in Brown v. Board of Education. Leon Hall, a civil rights

297. Background Essay: Hyde County School Boycott, supra note 294.298. Id.299. Id.300. Id.301. Id.; see also Cecelski, supra note 225 at 141 (discussing the arrest of several young peo-

ple for "blocking traffic" including one of the boycott's organizers, Golden Frinks, who wasarrested for contributing to the delinquency of minors during the boycott's March to Raleigh).

302. Cecelski, supra note 225, at 158-59. (During a special election held on November 5,1969, Hyde County voters voted down a bond referendum needed to expand MattamuskeetHigh School in order to make room to move all Black students into that school. As a result, theSchool Board's second choice, was to convert O.A. Peay and the Davis school into elementaryschools and have Mattamuskeet serve as the county's high school.).

303. Id. at 151, 160.304. Id. at 151 (Then Superintendent Singletary appointed a biracial Better Education Com-

mittee to review desegregation possibilities with him along with HEW and various stateofficials).

305. Id. at 160-61.

41




organizer and writer for the "Southern Exposure" magazine summedup the White resistant strategy:

They have decided to handle desegregation in a way that makes theprice [B]lack communities must pay so high that [B]lack citizens them-selves will stop pushing for desegregation and ask: is it worth it?Many [Bilack parents are forced to raise this question when they lookinto the eyes of their children, eyes that once held gaiety, spontaneityand joy and that now show sadness, frustration and anger. Is it worthsending children to encounter teachers who don't respect their per-sonhood? Is it worth having children tested in a way that labels themslow learners or educable mentally retarded or uneducable? 306

XII. CONCLUSION

The foundation of the African-American school system was basedon four basic and inseparable principles: (1) the schools were dedi-cated to maximizing the potential of every student who was enrolledin or assigned to that institution; (2) parents were strong, active sup-porters of the teachers and administrators because they had faith inand respect for their leadership and trusted them to prepare the stu-dents for life after graduation; (3) the African-American communitywas a prime stake-holder in the educational institution because it wasable to progress through the leadership and knowledge which wereprovided to its children; and (4) African-American teachers werededicated to providing the very best educational course of study forevery student who came into the school and they served as extendedfamily members to their communities.

The consequences of this deliberate and diabolic plan to destroyAfrican-American schools were devastating to African-Americancommunities, students, teachers, former administrators and for the fu-ture educational needs of the entire race. On this point, Cecelski sum-marized the results.

The consequences of losing [B]lack schools and educational leadershipproved far-reaching. Though many white educators taught [B]lack stu-dents with dedication and without prejudice, southern school leadersin general acted determined to fetter [B]lack talents and aspirationswithin the desegregated institutions. They tracked [B~lack childreninto lower-ability, vocational, and special education classes at dispro-portionate rates, leading to virtual segregation within many schools.Many school districts even designed segregated bus routes and ex-cluded [B]lack students from certain extracurricular activities. Blackstudents also encountered other classroom problems, including hostileattitudes, high rates of suspensions and expulsions, low academic ex-

306. Leon Hall, The Implementor's Revenge, SOUTHERN EXPOSURE, Summer 1979, at 123.

2013] 201

42




pectations, and little encouragement to prevent them from droppingout.307

When faced with the common practices, which Cecelski described, Af-rican-American students rebelled and fought back. Already angeredby the closing of African-American schools and the loss of teachers,administrators and coaches, the students who entered desegregatedschools were not in a mood to accept the deliberate demeaning atti-tudes and racist conduct which they encountered. Because of thistreatment and the aforementioned history, African-American stu-dents lost faith in and respect for the educational process. This loss offaith and respect has not been restored to date.

The destruction of the African-American schools permanently de-stroyed the bond that made the education of African-American chil-dren work. Prior to desegregation, everyone in the African-Americancommunity had a deep, abiding faith in and a profound respect forthose who worked in the schools. The African-American communityalso knew that these individuals were dedicated to improving the livesof every African-American student. That bond was broken and thebreach has never been restored.

As a result, the education process today suffers from and reportsthe exact same deficiencies, which arose as a result of the intentionalefforts by White school officials to destroy African-American schoolsand retard future educational efforts for African-American students.Many scholars are beginning to recognize that something very valua-ble to African-American students was lost in the desegregation discus-sions and the subsequent changes thereof: the spirit of community,commitment and pride. Unless these very important features are re-stored in our African-American students, we will continue to see thenegative consequences of the desegregation of public schools.

307. Cecelski, supra note 225, at 170.

43



Pimping Brown v. Board of Education: The Destruction of African … · 2020. 7. 31. · PIMPING...

Documents

Transcript of Pimping Brown v. Board of Education: The Destruction of African … · 2020. 7. 31. · PIMPING...